Address by the Prime Minister

[mseop 935]

There was some mention a couple of weeks ago that some of the monies were filtered into Bloc accounts.

Just curious, did it seem to be going anywhere?  Would you remember who made the allegation?

Thanks

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

From the little bit of Quebec news I watch the Bloc is taking political heat there also,.......but, once again, there really is no strong third party alternative there.
Maybe some of our Quebec-based posters could chip in here?

 

[a_majoor]

There was some mention a couple of weeks ago that some of the monies were filtered into Bloc accounts.

Since the entire stated purpose of the scheme was to fight separatists, that has to be the cruelest irony of all.....

 

[larry Strong]

I think it was Brault who brought it up in his testimony, at first the PQ denied it, then they said they were opening a bank account to collect it and give it back to the feds

 

[McG]

I personally believe we should let the Inquiry finish before we go to the polls again, but hey, I'm a simple minded Ontario voter.    

I'd also like to see an election held off until the inquiry is done.  I think voters deserve to hear what involvement (if any) their MP had in this scandal.

The other reason that I'm not in a hurry to see an election has been suggested through a few news editorials over the past few weeks.  An election today would likely produce another minority government.  The Conservatives have risen above the Liberals and might even take more seats, but I expect that the left would still come out on top (with the Liberals, Bloc, and NDP).  I'd rather not spend the next 4-5 years under a left coalition government

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

I'd also like to see an election held off until the inquiry is done.  I think voters deserve to hear what involvement (if any) their MP had in this scandal.

As long as Martin remains as PM, he retains some degree of control over the inquiry: one cannot help but wonder if his fears of losing an election before Gomery is complete goes beyond a sincere desire to "leave no stone unturned" ...

 

[Pieman]

An election today would likely produce another minority government.  The Conservatives have risen above the Liberals and might even take more seats, but I expect that the left would still come out on top (with the Liberals, Bloc, and NDP).  I'd rather not spend the next 4-5 years under a left coalition government

Neither would I, but really this is certainly how things are looking, isn't it? If  a minority conservative government was the election result, I can't help but wonder if the Conservatives would be able to keep control. We could be at the polls again this time next year

But really, everything depends on the voter sway in central Canada, and being from the west I can only make guesses at how deep of an impact this situation is having. Do people here feel that people in central Canada are really reacting to the situation, or are they shrugging their shoulders at it?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Just watched the whole address.

That inturperter really dropped the ball.

Did they just grab that guy off the street or what?  Dummy. Way to make an ass of yourself infront of the nation  

I think they should wait until the whole report comes out.
The last thing we need is an election where canadians, being the clever little souls they are, vote the liberals in again. Imagine the power trip they would be on.
"We can take money out of their pockets and they still vote for us!"

I gotta say it pissed me off hearing the PM commenting on how other important matters are being side lined. What the hell.
You know, i really can't think of a more important matter than a countries government lying to them and stealing their money. Millions and Millions of dollars.  

You want to talk about health care being swept aside? How many lives would have been saved with all that money placed in health care instead of liberal pockets.

 

[GENOMS Soilder]

You want to talk about health care being swept aside? How many lives would have been saved with all that money placed in health care instead of liberal pockets.

Well said....

I think its time for the Libs to step down and stop yanking at our chain(even though most Canadians respond :-\)
Who knows if Harper will be better-Hell, maybe the Green Party will get a sweeping majority and we won't have to cut our lawns anymore ;D
But seriously, this Liberal 'Power' is getting tiresome
.......time for some new corruption ;D

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Finally, I ordered that the Liberal party bring in auditors to conduct a forensic examination of its books and call in the RCMP to investigate what took place during that period.

How amusing. Why didn't this paragon of integrity call for this in the first place instead of that earlier whitewash "audit"?  An opportunity to do the right thing in that regard already arose and was passed up.

 

[larry Strong]

Probably because he hoped it would all go away, without having to do anything serious about it

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

>Finally, I ordered that the Liberal party bring in auditors to conduct a forensic examination of its books and call in the RCMP to investigate what took place during that period.

How amusing. Why didn't this paragon of integrity call for this in the first place instead of that earlier whitewash "audit"?  An opportunity to do the right thing in that regard already arose and was passed up.

The mind boggles ... why didn't every network have interviews with representatives from major accounting firms explaining what horsesh*t it is to describe what they did as an "audit"?

How gullible are we?

 

[larry Strong]

From what I understand, they were doing a "Forensic Audit" and the report was supposed to be submitted to the Gomery Inquiry last week.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

From what I understand, they were doing a "Forensic Audit" and the report was supposed to be submitted to the Gomery Inquiry last week.

What they did was a Review, not an Audit: I'm not splitting hairs here, because the two are very differant things.  An Audit confirms that transactions were genuine, and that all transactions were reported, and reported properly.  A Review is simply a confirmation by an accountant that the information provided to them has been correctly reported: a review does not confirm the veracity of the transactions, nor does it provide any speculation or inquiry into any transactions or items that have not bee reported.

In the case of what the Liberals are calling an "Audit" they ask the accountants (PwC & Deloitte, IIRC) to look at a few (four?) accounts and confirm that the transactions indicated by the Liberals are supported by the correct documention and correctly reported (although not a confirmation that the supporting documentation is genuine), which is a "Forensic Accounting Review".

At the end of the day, what it means is that Accountants are confirming that the Liberals have documentation to support what they say are some genuine transactions in a few accounts: there is no suggestion of anything else, particularly WRT any other transactions in these, or other, accounts.  Unless the Liberals were so stupid as to steal taxpayer money, report it but not create the supporting documentation and then tell the accountants that it was a legitimate transaction in one of these specific accounts, this "audit" would not detect a thing.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

The mind boggles ... why didn't every network have interviews with representatives from major accounting firms explaining what horsesh*t it is to describe what they did as an "audit"?

Timely article:

CBC killed liberal audit story

Last week, after my research (here and here) on the Liberals 'Audits' created a firestorm in the media and the House of Commons, I received an email from a CBC investigative journalist wanting to do a piece on the story. He was planning on investigating the conflict of interest regarding the Liberals and the accounting firms that had conducted the 'audits'.

After several phone conversations with him, and after him telling me he had interviews scheduled with some prominent forensic accountants, he informed me that his bosses did not want to pursue the story. The reason was because 'information that dug up has already been reported." It should be noted, however, that this journalist has exposed some past scandals within various levels of government and frankly, I am not questioning his integrity (which I respect) but what I am questioning is the integrity of his superiors reasoning for not reporting this story.

To his credit, this producer seemed genuinely interested in this story, and from what he told me, he had already done some extensive research on the topic. But, I think the explanation for failing to finish this story that I was given doesn't make sense. For example, only two news organizations reported this topic (CanWest and Globe and Mail), but they only reported what was said in parliament. Not one news entity has used 'investigative' journalism to actually dig around for some information that would be news worthy â “ and there are a lot of newsworthy items in this topic.

For example they could have investigated:

· The apparent conflict of interest between the Liberals and the accountants with regards to past donations;

· The fact that the one office that performed the 'audit' was such a large contributor to the Liberal party;

· To find out if there were any government contracts given to this office;

· On the revelations of how, Liberal Cabinet minister, Pierre Pettigrew was a former Vice President of the very same office that performed the less then through financial review on the Quebec wing of the Liberal party;

· On the fact that the review mysteriously did not review the riding associations finances â “ the very spot where the money is accused to have been funneled through;

· That last week Benoit Corbeil mentioned that some 'accountants' were implicated in this sponsorship scandal.

One would think that piecing the Liberal audit story together with these shockingly new Corbeil revelations would be worthy of a front page news story, but then again, this is CBC. To be honest, when CBC contacted me about this story, I had a gut feeling that the CBC would not even let this producer finish his story nor would they air his report if he did finish it. Perhaps it's because 82% of the CBC''s board of directors have donated to the Liberal party. Or perhaps investigating a story on the government and its misdoings might get you fired. This does happen at CBC, and if you don't think it does, then read Aarons article on former CBC radio host Don Hill's firing.

For these reasons, I am taking the CBC's decision to not report on this story with a slight indignation. Because I know full well that there were some very serious conflicts of interest exposed in the articles I wrote, and I also know if investigated, that it would have exposed the some questionable aspects of the Liberal party. If this had become a national news story then it would implicate the Party in some serious conflicts of interest. Furthermore I believe that because there are so many interesting aspects of this audit story, especially after what Benoit Corbeil has revealed last week, the CBC killed this story not because the topic was previously reported on (which it wasn't) but rather what it would reveal.

I can't say that I am shocked though, as I did not believe this story would ever make it through the â Å“buzz saw.â ? But it does further disenchant my belief in our tax payer funded CBC. I have always believed, and I will say this on record, that in a free and democratic society there is no ostensible reason to have a state run broadcasting outlet funded by the government â “ it's too easy for this corporation to be abused by the government in power. Too often is the CBC guilty of failing to hold the government accountable, and this is just another example of it. Perhaps the CBC believes that the costs of holding the government accountable (ie: funding cuts) are more important than providing the public information, which if presented, would shine a less then stellar light on the government. It is this very reason that I believe that a government funded media corporation should not exist in a 'free and democratic' society.

http://mkbraaten.blogspot.com/2005/04/cbc-killed-liberal-audit-story.html

 

[George Wallace]

Now, here is a popular Ottawa Journalist, who has his finger on the pulse of the nation:



http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Columnists/Ottawa/Earl_McRae/2005/04/26/1012928.html

Tue, April 26, 2005


PM, sweep advice under rug

By Earl McRae -- For the Ottawa Sun


So how about it, Prime Minister Martin, are you going to tell us their names?

Did you, yourself, realize how damning your remark was?

Did you not know, when you said it, what an affirmation it was for all those Canadians who think politicians and those who work for politicians are a bunch of lying, cheating, deceitful bums who'll resort to anything at the expense of honesty to save their jobs?


Did you not know how disillusioning your remark was for all those Canadians still naive enough to believe that politicians and those who work for politicians are essentially honest and would never try to pull the proverbial wool over the eyes of the people?

What does it say about the character of those you haven't named that they would even dare suggest it to you? What does it say about their assessment of your character that they felt safe suggesting it to you?

Your remark in question was made Sunday on the national CBC radio phone-in show Cross Country Checkup.

Callers were slamming you and your party over the Adscam scandal. This made you squirm. This made you say to the people of Canada: "I didn't have to call the (Gomery) commission. I could have done what most politicians would do -- just try to avoid it ..."

And that you had been given "tons" of advice not to set up the inquiry and "to hide this thing" and to "put it under the rug."

What a stunning remark, this. Stunning for your honesty or, politically, your stupidity. If you were being stupidly honest, I congratulate you.

Imagine: You, a politician, and the prime minister to boot, actually admitting to us, the people, that your fellow politicians are such sleazeballs, including in your own government I assume, that "most" of them would have turned themselves inside out not to give us, the people who elected them, the reeking truth.

Not "some" of them, not "a few" of them, but MOST of them.

Incredible. What's that say about you and politicians, of which you are one?

What a confidence booster for the electorate.

And if that wasn't appalling enough for our ears, you didn't say you got "no" advice to cover up the scandal, you didn't say you got a "smidge" of advice, you said you got TONS of advice to do so.

Obviously, this "tons" of advice came from save-our-asses scumbags friendly to your Liberal Party, or in your very government -- advisers, cronies, MPs.

Stinkingly crooked

But, what I want to know from you today Mr. Martin, what the people of Canada deserve to know from you, is this: What action have you taken, what action are you going to take against the perpetrators who have such disrespect for the people of Canada, and truth and honesty, and the integrity of government, that, through "tons" of advice, they wanted you to "hide this thing," to "put it under the rug?"

Were you angry when they gave you this "tons" of advice? Did you tear strips off them, big time?

Did you tell them they are as stinkingly crooked, in their own way, as the wretches being exposed at the Gomery inquiry who ripped off us, the Canadian taxpayers?

Are these the kind of people you want giving you advice?

Cover-up artists?

You want advice, Mr. Martin? You, who say you set up the Gomery inquiry to expose the truth and bring justice? You, who tell us you're all about honesty and integrity and sterling character?

Well, I'll give you some advice. My fellow Canadians and I will be glad to give you "tons" of this anti-dithering advice, and it is this: Go on TV before the nation again. Look right into our eyes. Tell us you believe in honesty and truth and shining character in politics and government. And then, Prime Minister, you prove it by telling us who they were who gave you "tons" of advice to cover up the contaminating cesspool, to keep it from us, and then tell us what you did to these people, or said to these people, if you did or said anything at all.

Do we, do you, want people of this mindset advising and operating? Your silence as to their identity is a slap in the face to Canadians. And -- a coverup. Out with it, Mr. Martin. Let the chips fall where they may. That's chips, sir, not chits.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

what action are you going to take against the perpetrators who have such disrespect for the people of Canada, and truth and honesty, and the integrity of government, that, through "tons" of advice, they wanted you to "hide this thing," to "put it under the rug?"

More pardons than a drunken butler at Buckingham Palace ...

 

[a_majoor]

Now of course, Mr Layton has settled on his price. Through the use of blackmail, he has managed to institute the program of the Non Democratic Party, despite the fact it has no mandate to do so, and as part of the bargain, will support a government which is broken, adrift and has lost its moral authoraty to govern.

Not bad for $4 billion.

 

[Infanteer]

What else did you expect from a guy who has the air of a used-car salesman?

 

[McG]

I think the budget was written to get Conservative support and keep the Liberal government in power.  Now that the Conservatives have made it clear they intend to take down the government, it is not surprising that the Liberals would find the next most likely party to keep them alive.  Buy making it a clear crusade to oust the Liberals, Harper has now forced them into the coalition of the left that I hoped not to see.

He'd better hope he is able to force an election (or at least force the GG to invite him to try forming a government).  If not, then all he will have achieved is to establish a Liberal government that is further left and less inclined to negotiate with the right.