No ethics breach in Emerson case?

73 posts / 0 new
Last post

A verbatim quote from Mr. Emerson on election night:



"I BELIEVE BRITISH COLUMBIA IS INHERENTLY A LIBERAL PROVINCE"

"I THINK THAT THERE ARE HIGHLY ETHICAL HIGHLY MOTIVATED GOOD PEOPLE IN THE LIBERAL PARTY"

"I WOULD LIKE TO BE STEPHEN HARPERS WORST NIGHTMARE WHEN IT COMES TO BAD POLICY....IF HE WANTS TO MAKE BAD POLICY FOR CANADA, I'M GOING TO BE IN HIS FACE IN HIS CABINET MINISTERS FACE ALL THE TIME"



From 05/23/05:

"I HOPE THEY DO VIEW ME AS A FRIEND OF PAUL MARTINS BECAUSE IF I AM CLOSE TO THE PRIME MINISTER I THINK THAT ALLOWS ME TO GET MORE WORK DONE AND DO THINGS FOR THE RIDING THAT OTHERWISE MIGHT NOT GET DONE."


Geez, with friends like that, who needs enemies? People are upset because David Emerson is not a man of his word. His words mean nothing and you can't believe anything he tells you or trust him to do as he says.

I reallllly wanted to stay out of this but what stump posted got me thinking - couldn't emerson cause just as much if not more 'nightmares' in cabinet that out....I mean if he's just the opposition you can let him windbag all day and just deflect his questions. He may have gotten a few jabs in but overall he'd have been a very low grade nightmare - more of a nightpony so to speak. But inside the cabinet he can really gum up the works - try to create division on issues - withhold his vote on matters of import - cause meetings to go off the rails etc..... so to an extent he could very well be in a position to uphold his promise better in the position he's in that he was before.....


That said - it was a dumb manoeuver, politically and ethically. Optics on it are horrid and on many levels it just adds to the disdain people have for politicians. I'd say go for a byelection - but time it for after the lumber deal is done - that baby needs to be put to bed before the US election crap starts up again in the summer.

Just a heads up Stump, but when Carole Taylor, Carole James, Jack Layton, George Bush or John Kerry gives the speech about how much the other team sucks, it's just part of the game. You have to respect the game and play the game well. Still, it is just part of the game.



It's not a game.



Nightpony is a fun word. Good one Mr. C.

hey stop touching your nightpony or you'll go blind

falling into the things you'd rather hear Carole Taylor than Carole James say

CT is a GILF!

*blushes*


-Craig

LOL. (you wish!)


Temple 1 Stump 0


"Just a heads up Stump, but when Carole Taylor, Carole James, Jack Layton, George Bush or John Kerry gives the speech about how much the other team sucks, it's just part of the game. You have to respect the game and play the game well. Still, it is just part of the game. "


Bullshit, its called lying. And its a shame that we are so jadded by our leadership that our expectations run so low as to endorse this attitude. I want leaders who do what they'll say and say what they'll do. I want leaders who I respect, not car salesmen who'll say anything to get you to buy. I want a few strait talkers who'll give you the credit of having an ounce of intelligence rather than constant manipulation.

Yeah Brian, Reform tried that when they first put together the opposition in the house of commons. They were going to refrain from partisanship, bring some decorum to the house of commons and generally behave in a constructive, reasonable manner. They even gave their questions to the Liberals ahead of time for review so something constructive could come out of question period. Without the one-liners and zingers, the public and the media ignored reform and their popularity sank. The Liberals did take advantage and played the old political game and got good coverage out of it and saw their polling numbers rise.



I am sorry you are being told for the first time Brian, but it is a game. You have to scream, stomp your foot and act indignant to get yourself heard.

Sooooo, apparently Gateway AND the Olympics funding aren't benefiting from Emerson's influence in Ottawa (cuts in this week's federal budget) quite as expected. Quel freakin surprise.


Where's your golden boy now folks? At home trying to figure out which side of his mouth he'll talk out of tomorrow?


de-elect Emerson!


You're upset that there is less funding for Gateway and the Olympics? And you want to de-elect him?


Stump, he is obviously after your vote.

Be nice stump, it wasn't all bad.


Now my $1.00 slice of pizza will be $1.13!!

"You're upset that there is less funding for Gateway and the Olympics? And you want to de-elect

him?


Stump, he is obviously after your vote."


Said it before, I'll say it again. There are parts of Gateway that make a ton of sense.


And I'm not worried about the Olympics. Heck, they're gonna pay for themselves. We'll all be

bathing in champagne and lighting Romeo Y Julietas with hundred dollar bills when that two week

party is over!


The joke is on Emerson's supporters who crowed about how he was the man to get us fair treatment

in Ottawa for Gateway, 2010, and softwood. Can you say oh for three?



Stump, the way I read the article from the Sun is that he was going to tighten the screws on spending for both projects and Ottawa was not going to fund cost over runs, something that people have been crying for who have been critical of these projects. How this is going to shake out politically in the next few years is anyone's guess. This government is only good for a year.


As far as fair treatment from Ottawa, I don't know if we are getting it. I know that the trade agreement, when first floated, was criticized. Mainly because it was not fair or what Canada deserves, but it the best you could get under current political circumstances. I do know the other major criticism of the deal is that it favoured B.C.'s interests over Ontario's. So when you say that we are not getting fair treatment from Ottawa, I guess--in an abstract and very principled way--you have a point.

Surtaxes Denied!

Author: [ Eric5 ] Eric Beyer Tue May 30 20:28:42 PDT 2006


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 29, 2006 - Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty and Minister of International Trade David L. Emerson announced today that the Government of Canada will not impose special surtaxes on imports of bicycles and barbeques. This decision came after special trade restrictions for these products were suggested last fall by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) in an attempt to counter increasing imports.

"After considering all of the information, it was determined that temporary protective tariffs simply wouldn’t provide a competitive long-term solution in these two cases," said Minister Flaherty. "We want to grow and strengthen our economy, and imposing these surtaxes would have increased costs for both Canadian retailers and consumers."


"The Government of Canada recognizes that many Canadian manufacturers are adjusting to fast-changing global realities," added Minister Emerson. "We will continue to work closely with the private sector to develop trade strategies that will maximize the benefits of Canada’s role in global supply chains."


For more information; Department of Finance Canada

Good news that has come about with months of lobbying by a variety of sources. Hardly something Emerson can take much credit for.


Will you be writing his official hagiography Michael? :-)

If you're going to make him the scapegoat for anything negative that happens under his watch, then it is only fair to laud him for anything good that comes along as well.

I don't think he's been scapegoated for anything (at least in this thread).


I believe a hagiogrpahy is a "A worshipful or idealizing biography." I don't think you can describe my comments as worship. I just lauded Harper's decision to make a cabinet appointment that was the most practical, not the most principled. (Hang me on that if you want. Wasn't politics once described somewhere as being "the art of the possible"?) Being considered one of the smartest guys in the Alliance/Tory caucus is hardly a compliment.

I don't think he's a man of his word, that's why I find him lacking as a leader. And I think you've given him too much credit in all three of those decisions, but w/e. I think principle counts for more than you do apparently. So it goes... the hagiography comment was a jest btw.


As they say, even Mussolini got the trains to run on time. Didn't make him a good guy though did it? (Is that Godwin by association?)

Pages