Bev Oda

[Martino]

Stuff like this will end when the Conservatives get a majority and have a Conservative speaker in the House.  Not that Peter Milliken has done a bad job but partisanship seems to shine through at times.

What "stuff"? Responsible government?

Oda openly lied to a parliamentary committee, that's contempt regardless of the other charges laid against her.

 

[brihard]

Once upon a time a politician who coul dbe demosntrated to have lied to Parliament would have fallen upon her metaphorical sword and faded quickly into ignominy.

There should be no room for her any longer in our government.

 

[Dennis Ruhl]

What "stuff"? Responsible government?

Oda openly lied to a parliamentary committee, that's contempt regardless of the other charges laid against her.

The beauty of responsible government is that the government being in contempt of the House is irrelevant because the only penalty is pulling the plug and that's happening within the week one way or another. 

I looked at questions and answers in committee and have trouble picking out the lies.  The answers to which questions were lies?  Perhaps the committee was expecting answers to questions they didn't ask.

Once upon a time a politician who coul dbe demosntrated to have lied to Parliament would have fallen upon her metaphorical sword and faded quickly into ignominy.

There should be no room for her any longer in our government.

Who would ever have thought a politician would lie?  Maybe most of the voting public thinks it's commonplace.  It's a big issue on CBC but unhead of in coffee shops.

 

[Brasidas]

Who would ever have thought a politician would lie?  Maybe most of the voting public thinks it's commonplace.  It's a big issue on CBC but unhead of in coffee shops.

...again, what's "this stuff" that's going to end when the conservatives get a majority?

The liberals are hardly historically clean, but a majority and more power doesn't seem like a ticket honourable government.

Dumping a deceitful minister might not lead to a 10% boost in the polls, but I doubt it would hurt conservative fortunes.

 

[Dennis Ruhl]

Was Oda being deceitful?  I think she was toying with the hostile committee who couldn't figure out what questions to ask.  I suspect there was no untruthfulness involved in any of the answers but the net effect was to mislead.  When Oda and the powers that be realized the bad optics she came clean.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I prefer to be an optimist in all this. Instead of seeing boogeymen and deceitful politicians, I see a minister that wouldn't bow to the status quo and political fanagaling of special interests and saved the taxpayers over seven million dollars with a single word.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

saved the taxpayers over seven million dollars with a single word.

Could we get her to write a long book ?

 

[hold_fast]

Too bad she couldn't properly save us seven million dollars by simply initialling the change, just as you'd initial any change on your cheque. Or maybe, you know, fess up to it when it came up in parliament instead of ducking around it. Then causing it to be drawn out and debated, wasting a bunch of taxpayer dollars by wasting time.

Seriously, if you can't go and make a new document with one word inserted and then have that signed again as a legible legal document and instead would prefer to doodle in a change, you shouldn't be managing a McDonald's let alone in a position of public leadership.

 

[JB 11 11]

Then causing it to be drawn out and debated, wasting a bunch of taxpayer dollars by wasting time.

Funny, I thought  that was what our minority governments been doing for the past few years? :facepalm:

 

[The Bread Guy]

I prefer to be an optimist in all this. Instead of seeing boogeymen and deceitful politicians, I see a minister that wouldn't bow to the status quo and political fanagaling of special interests and saved the taxpayers over seven million dollars with a single word.

If she'd said that the first time she was asked, I think it would have taken a lot of the wind out of the Iggy-ites'/other anti-Tories' sails.

 

[Danjanou]

Sorry to revive a necro post but breaking news:

(reproduced with the usual caveats)

Embattled Bev Oda stepping down this month as member of Parliament

..OTTAWA - Bev Oda, the embattled minister of international co-operation, is stepping down as an MP at the end of this month.

In a statement on her website, Oda said she handed in her resignation two weeks ago, giving up the southern Ontario seat she has held for eight years.

Oda has come under increasing scrutiny for her spending practices and accountability.

Most recently she drew fire for insisting on staying at a posh hotel during a trip to London, and charging taxpayers the equivalent of $16 for a glass of orange juice.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued a news release today praising Oda's hard work and dedication.

Before she was named to the international development post, Oda was the minister for Canadian Heritage.

...

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/embattled-bev-oda-stepping-down-month-member-parliament-170621144.html

 

[Remius]

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/tory-minister-bev-oda-stepping-down-at-end-of-month-1.863576

Link here.

 

[Danjanou]

threads merged.

 

[dapaterson]

I suspect we'll see a nice patronage post in her future, as her resignation (1) does a bit of otherwise awkward housecleaning and (2) provides a cover for a much-needed federal cabinet shuffle.

 

[dapaterson]

I suspect we'll see a nice patronage post in her future, as her resignation (1) does a bit of otherwise awkward housecleaning and (2) provides a cover for a much-needed federal cabinet shuffle.

Well, according to the Right Honorable the Prime Minister, I'm RTFO.  Steady hand on the helm until he reaches the middle of his term (say summer 2013).

 

[GAP]

Part of the non shuffle may be that Harper is purposely NOT responding to MSM speculation. He has done that pretty consistantly....it keeps them off guard if he does not do the predictable....

 

[jeffb]

Part of the non shuffle may be that Harper is purposely NOT responding to MSM speculation. He has done that pretty consistently....it keeps them off guard if does not do the predictable....

I hope that is not the case. A good PM would ensure that his cabinet is aligned to best suit the needs of the country that his party is governing, not to score points in the political game. However, I suspect given the proclivity of the Harper government to spend as much time as it does worrying about the MSM, even during a majority government situation and while pretending that it doesn't, you may be right.

 

[Edward Campbell]

See here; I still think John Ibbitson has it about right: Prime Minister Harper has two priorities: a balanced budget by 2015 and expanded trade.

The first and foremost priority is to stay on track toward a balanced budget, which is the finance minister’s job. No one doubts Jim Flaherty’s ability to handle that task. Mr. Flaherty is on his way to becoming Canada’s longest serving finance minister.

The government’s other great priority, the one by which it will judge itself and be judged, is expanding trade. Even before Wednesday’s announcement, there was widespread expectation within the government and the public service that on this front stability would trump change.

From the Globe and Mail article cited above.

Further, as Ibbitson says, "It was never likely that Mr. Harper would shake up a team that was doing exactly what he wants them to do: pulling out all stops to expand trade, especially resource exports to Asia."

This is not a remarkable cabinet, but then there are few times when men of the calibre of, say, Louis St Laurent and CD Howe could be attracted to public life and, fortunately, we don't live in them. (They being a World War (complicated by a national unity crisis), for St Laurent and the Great Depression for Howe.) It is likely that, in the PM"s view, the people who "best suit the needs of the country" in 2012 are at the cabinet table now.

 

[jeffb]

It is likely that, in the PM"s view, the people who "best suit the needs of the country" in 2012 are at the cabinet table now.

I don't disagree with you. The depth of talent in Parliament is unfortunately quite shallow (in all parties). My comment was directed at the idea that he may be making cabinet composition decisions based on keeping the MSM on their toes rather then good governance. 

 

[Edward Campbell]

I don't disagree with you. The depth of talent in Parliament is unfortunately quite shallow (in all parties). My comment was directed at the idea that he may be making cabinet composition decisions based on keeping the MSM on their toes rather then good governance.

I understood your original comment; I wanted to highlight two points, the very ordinariness of the talent pool (a point upon which we appear to agree) and Prime Minister Harper's proclivity to "leave well enough alone."

But: I am also, reasonably, certain that he does like to confound the experts, especially the 'experts' in the media, and I am absolutely sure that partisan political considerations enter into every cabinet making session, and have since Robert Walpole got the whole "prime minister is first among equals" thing going.