Politics in 2017

[The Bread Guy]

The previous Conservative government, and likely other governments that preceded it, also donated large sums of money to the Aga Khan. I doubt that there is any story there.

I doubt that anybody would object to the helicopter ride in question, as there was, apparently, no reasonable alternative.

The nature of the passengers accompanying the Trudeaus looks a little fishy, though, but may still be explainable.

What really gets the press, and others, going, however, is secrecy and cover-up.  People do not attempt to cover things up, of course, unless there is reason to do so.

Had this been done openly, nobody would have paid the slightest amount of attention. Few would even see the hypocrisy or double standard. Sunny days trump everything else. Here, how about a selfie?

There you go being reasonable in a political thread ...  ;D

 

[Jarnhamar]

You mean they're donating money to a philanthropic organization with a phenomenal track record of providing developmental assistance around the world?!?!

Say it ain't so!

:gloomy:

Say can you think of a province a little closer to home where some of that 55 million could help out in their current crisis?
I'll give you a hint,  this province gave a lot of money in the past to other provinces for equalization payments and their suicide rate is  presently on the way up. 

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Loachman]
The previous Conservative government, and likely other governments that preceded it, also donated large sums of money to the Aga Khan. I doubt that there is any story there.

[/quote]

Fair enough.  Honest question,  did any other government, leaders spend the holidays at this private Island?

I still think this on the heels of the $5000 a seat liberal fund raisers where the pm initially lied about whether or not they talked business is very telling of the government and their rules don't apply mindset.

 

[Loachman]

As the Aga Khan is an old family friend, I do not see visiting him at his home, not matter its value, as anything unusual or wrong.

Other politicians have likely stayed at other family friends' cottages etcetera in the past, with nothing being said and nobody caring.

And it is not easy to say this, about the "leader" of a party that I despise, and who, himself, grossly underwhelms me at best.

But fair is fair.

 

[gryphonv]

I keep remembering how big the firestorm over Peter Mackays kerfuffle with our Helicopters. A defense minister using tools available to him.

The liberals were on board to cry foul about that.

This to me is worse. If the Khan's didn't receive any funds from the government it would be a non issue.

But with all that said, the smug attitude that our PM takes regarding this is making it worse. He should of known it would of been an issue. At the very least he should of ran it by the ethics commissioner first, or came clean about it right away.

Some will say that what our PM does on his own time is his own business and such. I'm sorry but no, when you are a politician, you are to be held to a higher standard. Kind of like how when we are out of uniform and get in trouble with the law, we can still be charged by our own Chain.

There may be a very good reason why the helicopter was used, and it probably and most likely made the most sense. But its the smugness, hiding, and non disclosure of the fact, even when presented with direct questions is the issue. For someone who campaigned on Openness and Transparency.

 

[George Wallace]

As the Aga Khan is an old family friend, I do not see visiting him at his home, not matter its value, as anything unusual or wrong.

Other politicians have likely stayed at other family friends' cottages etcetera in the past, with nothing being said and nobody caring.

And it is not easy to say this, about the "leader" of a party that I despise, and who, himself, grossly underwhelms me at best.

But fair is fair.

Would be so very true, if not for the fact that everything that he is doing, is exactly what he condemned the previous Government of doing.......and is still blaming them and other Provincial Governments......But what the hey....He can play by his own rules.

 

[Loachman]

I keep remembering how big the firestorm over Peter Mackays kerfuffle with our Helicopters. A defense minister using tools available to him.

There is a difference.

A SAR helicopter is not a minister's personal means of transport.

Now - was a great sin committed on that occasion? I think not. A crew could easily fit something like that into a training trip, do a favour for the boss, and demonstrate a capability for no real cost to the public - a training trip would have been flown anyway. It just did not look good when the press found out.

In Trudeau's case, he was visiting a family friend, there was no other means of getting from airport to island, so his friend had him picked up by his usual means of getting around. This was logical and practical under the circumstances, and it cost Canadian taxpayers nothing.

The whole holiday was shrouded in secrecy, however, and that is what really looks bad in this case. It looks like a cover-up, and cover-ups happen for reasons.

This to me is worse. If the Khan's didn't receive any funds from the government it would be a non issue.

If the size of the donation increases considerably, then an argument can be made for wrongdoing.

But with all that said, the smug attitude that our PM takes regarding this is making it worse. He should of known it would of been an issue. At the very least he should of ran it by the ethics commissioner first, or came clean about it right away.

Yup. Stupid, and/or arrogant.

Some will say that what our PM does on his own time is his own business and such. I'm sorry but no, when you are a politician, you are to be held to a higher standard. Kind of like how when we are out of uniform and get in trouble with the law, we can still be charged by our own Chain.

Rich people tend to have rich friends. I have no problem with that. They socialize together. You or I might pick a buddy up from an airport. Where's the harm? His buddy picked him up.

Kind of like how when we are out of uniform and get in trouble with the law, we can still be charged by our own Chain.

No crime was committed.

There may be a very good reason why the helicopter was used, and it probably and most likely made the most sense.

Yes. There was no better way to get there.

I suppose that a boat could have been used, although it would have been much slower, but, really, what's the difference whether a boat or a helicopter was used?

But its the smugness, hiding, and non disclosure of the fact, even when presented with direct questions is the issue. For someone who campaigned on Openness and Transparency.

Yup. Typical Liberal behaviour. That, I neither can, nor will, defend.

 

[YZT580]

There are charter aircraft available in Nassau both fixed wing float and helicopter.  His office could have stated in advance the flight arrangements for approval; probably would have been granted.  It is interesting that all reports to the commissioner came out after the trip was revealed by the press.  I googled Trudeau and his guests and cannot find another occasion when these individuals socialized together for a weekend let alone a whole week. 

 

[jollyjacktar]

Today's Halifax Chronicle Herald cartoon fits right in.  Burce MacKinnon cartoon 18 Jan 17

 

[Journeyman]

No crime was committed.

You keep saying that, despite the Conflict of Interest Act being cited in the thread several  times.
(Ref: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-36.65/FullText.html).

There is no clause saying, "unless they're just buddies hangin' out."  It's a law; not a suggestion.  It was ignored. 

 

[Remius]

You keep saying that, despite the Conflict of Interest Act being cited in the thread several  times.
(Ref: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-36.65/FullText.html).

There is no clause saying, "unless they're just buddies hangin' out."  It's a law; not a suggestion.  It was ignored.

Still does not mean it was a "crime".  Breaking a law does not always equate to a crime in the legal sense.  Was the act violated, likely, was it criminal? 

 

[YZT580]

Mirror mirror on the wall whose the (fill in the blank) of them all.  This picture is worth far more than 1000 words in defining our present PM

 

[Jarnhamar]

Still does not mean it was a "crime".  Breaking a law does not always equate to a crime in the legal sense.  Was the act violated, likely, was it criminal?

lol
Ya, if anything Trudeau is the victim here 


I'm excited to see which Canadian law he blatantly violates next. I'll be disappointed if it's not under a cloud of secrecy.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Still does not mean it was a "crime".  Breaking a law does not always equate to a crime in the legal sense.

And in what sense is that?

I'm one to give Prince Valiant the benefit of the doubt (up until now, anyway), but if that's what the law says ...

 

[Good2Golf]

Perhaps while a Proof is a Proof, a Law is not necessarily a Law?

 

[Remius]

And in what sense is that?

I'm one to give Prince Valiant the benefit of the doubt (up until now, anyway), but if that's what the law says ...

Violating certain Acts, be they federal, provincial or municipal does not always equate to it being criminal.  If I blow through a stop sign or get caught speeding I can be charged under a traffic act, it does not mean I get a criminal record necessarily.  If you get charged under the NDA you don't always get a criminal record even though you violated the act.  Same goes for things like the privacy act and the access to info act.  Laws can be broken under those but it won't always equate to criminal prosecutions.  Fines, public shaming etc are all possibilities sure.  But if any of you think he's a criminal or will be prosecuted as crime for this think again.

So when Loachman says "no Crime was committed" he's likely right.  He didn't say "no law was broken".

 

[gryphonv]

And in what sense is that?

I'm one to give Prince Valiant the benefit of the doubt (up until now, anyway), but if that's what the law says ...

Unfortunately this situation is similar to breaking the speed limit while driving. It's not a criminal offense. The max punishment the ethics commissioner can give is a fine of $500. Which is purely symbolic, though the damage to the part will be real.

 

[Remius]

lol
Ya, if anything Trudeau is the victim here 


I'm excited to see which Canadian law he blatantly violates next. I'll be disappointed if it's not under a cloud of secrecy.

Not at all. But it likely is not a criminal offence.

 

[Rifleman62]

Apparently speaking any one of the two official languages only depends which province you are in. ;D

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/trudeau-town-hall-sherbrooke-quebec-public-questions-1.3940058

Justin Trudeau speaks only French at Sherbrooke town hall, despite English questions

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau answered questions ranging from local concerns about public transit to tabling new federal pot legislation at Tuesday night's town hall in Sherbrooke, Que., and he answered them all in French — because, he said, "we're in Quebec."

A woman asked in English what would be done to help Anglo-Quebecers seeking mental health services when those services are only available in French.

"Thank you for your use of both official languages," Trudeau replied in French.

"But we're in a French province so I will answer in French," he answered, as the woman grew visibly annoyed.

"All people who speak one of the two official languages should feel comfortable across the country," he said, in French, while highlighting the federal government's investment in health.

Trudeau spoke exclusively in French, despite a half dozen English questions.

 

[Altair]

Apparently speaking any one of the two official languages only depends which province you are in. ;D

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/trudeau-town-hall-sherbrooke-quebec-public-questions-1.3940058

Justin Trudeau speaks only French at Sherbrooke town hall, despite English questions

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau answered questions ranging from local concerns about public transit to tabling new federal pot legislation at Tuesday night's town hall in Sherbrooke, Que., and he answered them all in French — because, he said, "we're in Quebec."

A woman asked in English what would be done to help Anglo-Quebecers seeking mental health services when those services are only available in French.

"Thank you for your use of both official languages," Trudeau replied in French.

"But we're in a French province so I will answer in French," he answered, as the woman grew visibly annoyed.

"All people who speak one of the two official languages should feel comfortable across the country," he said, in French, while highlighting the federal government's investment in health.

Trudeau spoke exclusively in French, despite a half dozen English questions.

Pandering to French Canadians who helped him break through past the NDP.

English Quebecers only have one place to park their federal vote right now.

That said, isn't this a topic for another thread?