- Reaction score
- 6,143
- Points
- 1,160
Jed said:I appreciate the thoughtful way you have dealt with what is a subtle drive by hit.
You're welcome
Jed said:I appreciate the thoughtful way you have dealt with what is a subtle drive by hit.
Unless someone's read something different I haven't seen (more than likely, given the speed of events unfolding), that's still an IF if we believe what The Canadian Press wrote:Brihard said:... if the Liberal party caucus voted on this and elected not to impose that section of the Reform Act upon themselves, then they are not bound by it, and then there is no breaking of the law in the party leader expelling someone from caucus unilaterally ...
We know from the Speaker's decision that ...... Those votes never occurred in the Liberal caucus following Trudeau's victory in 2015. Rather, the newly elected MPs — presumably including Philpott and Wilson-Raybould — voted unanimously to defer the matter to the Liberal party's next convention. Chong's reforms were never discussed at two subsequent Liberal conventions ...
So, as Colin P said, $5 and a form may free up that tidbit of information ...... the Parliamentary Secretary to the Government House Leader informed the House that the Chair of the National Liberal Caucus had indeed sent the requisite letter to the Speaker, specifying that the provisions of the Act regarding the expulsion and readmission of caucus members would not apply for the 42nd Parliament. This, in his view, makes this question of privilege moot and removes any confusion as to which rules apply. Furthermore, he argued that it is not the role of the Speaker to adjudicate such matters ... It is the caucus of each recognized party, not the Speaker, which bears the responsibility for ensuring that these votes are held ...
I think it was a good reply. Thank you.Furniture said:Not the reply you expected, was it?
milnews.ca said:$5 and a form may free up that tidbit of information ...
Remius said:Parliament (HofC and Senate) is exempt from ATIP I believe. So not likely...
Navy_Pete said:There isn't a blanket ATIP exemption for all parliamentary business, just cabinet confidence things that apply to decisions taken. You can read it for yourself here;
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-1/page-1.html
Also you can find the list of all completed ATIPs here; https://open.canada.ca/en/access-to-information
Funnily enough, there was one for a 'risk assessment if SNC had been convicted of bribery' with zero returns (ie record didn't exist). So either one was never done under due diligence, it didn't ever get to the correct person to find the record, or someone lied and said they didn't have one. Don't envy the person that got the ATIP request to process this one; that could have been any number of departments that would have gotten tagged with that one(PSPC? Finance? ISED?). But something should have come back, if they are pushing PPSC to look at the deffered prosecution option due to job impacts.
Sometimes people get greasy and try and lawyer their way out of them too (they asked for a risk assessment, but maybe it was called an impact assessment or something). That always kind of annoyed me, but would be interested to see the other side and how they go about putting together their information requests. Sometimes they are shotgun fishing expeditions, but othertimes they ask for very specific documents.
Used to joke about submitting an ATIP on the files I was working on to see if it ever got to me, but that would be a pretty good way to ruin a coworkers day.
Journeyman said:-- behaviours that are apparently unseen south of the border).
:not-again:
Party aninal ;DLumber said:Lots of reasons, but it mostly boils down to that I like filling out the census.
Jarnhamar said:You must be an animal at parties ;D
Just kidding. On the bright side if you change your mind and don't want to fill out the census anymore it's only up to a $500 instead of 3 months in jail. My only point of contention was the government forcing people to fill it out. You mention it's a way to get the best data on your population, we've seen how biased the government can be with data- using it only when it suits them. That's off topic though.
It's a simple comparison; you're torn apart by periodic behaviours in our Prime Minister that are the foundational bedrock of Trump's personality.... a political leader you clearly worship.Fishbone Jones said:This story is in Canadian politics. Why would you bring up the US?
Remius said:FOIA is an American thing.
In Canada it is ATIP.
milnews.ca said:Unless someone's read something different I haven't seen (more than likely, given the speed of events unfolding), that's still an IF if we believe what The Canadian Press wrote:We know from the Speaker's decision that ...So, as Colin P said, $5 and a form may free up that tidbit of information ...
Colin P said:The law is explicit, they must vote.
On the "what they're voting on", you're right. On the how, though, the law says (49.8 (3)), "The vote of each caucus member, in each vote, is to be recorded" so the record must be SOMEWHERE.Brihard said:The law says they must vote. It doesn’t explicitly state what the question must be. 49.8(1) says they “shall conduct a separate vote among the caucus members in respect of each of the following questions:”
Tick, tick, tick, indeed ...Brihard said:October isn’t far. Patience.
milnews.ca said:On the "what they're voting on", you're right. On the how, though, the law says (49.8 (3)), "The vote of each caucus member, in each vote, is to be recorded" so the record must be SOMEWHERE.Tick, tick, tick, indeed ...
Colin P said:I stopped using ATIP outside of government because no one knew what I was talking about. I have done many both asking and providing.
And now, some are told to ONLY include time spent searching hard-copy files in the "time needed" box, not searching electronic files.Colin P said:Back in the day, ATIPs cost $800 per hour of mainframe use......
Oldgateboatdriver said:And if SNC goes, the good people of Toronto can kiss goodbye to the maintenance of highway 407-ETR for awhile until the situation is resolved, because it is owned and operated by SNC.
OMERS Announces Signing of Agreement for Acquisition of Stake in 407 International Inc.
April 05, 2019
OMERS Infrastructure today announced that it has signed a purchase and sale agreement with SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. for the acquisition of a 10.01% stake in 407 International Inc., which holds a concession over 407 Express Toll Route (“407 ETR”). The purchase price consists of an upfront payment of C$3.0 billion. The sale is subject to certain shareholders’ rights, including rights-of-first refusal.
https://www.omers.com/News/Investing-News/2019/OMERS-stake-407-international-inc