Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Mulcair - representing the majority of Canadians . . .
1 view
Skip to first unread message
NDP@35%
Apr 4, 2012, 9:49:57 PM4/4/12
to
Here he is asking a pretty straight-forward question of a Harper Con. . . . .
________________________________
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
The Commons: Accepting responsibilities without taking responsibility
The Scene. ”Who was responsible for the F-35?” Thomas Mulcair asked at the outset.
This was both straightforward and profound. A direct question, but a philosophical riddle. If a
massive abuse of procedure and accountability falls in the forest, but no one is named, blamed
and shamed as the culprit, did it ever really happen?
One is reminded of the moment last November when Tony Clement could not say precisely who had
broken the rules in the G8 Legacy Fund affair. “Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General is very clear
regarding the responsibilities in this respect,” the Prime Minister offered by way of response.
Mr. Mulcair seemed to feel a lesson was in order. Our parliamentary system, he said, is based
on the principle of ministerial responsibility. The minister is responsible for his ministry.
The Prime Minister is responsible for picking his ministers. ”Does the Prime Minister think,”
Mr. Mulcair wondered, “that the Defence Minister has done his job?”
“Yes,” Mr. Harper offered. “The government and ministers accept their responsibilities.”
The leader of the opposition was unsatisfied. . . .
“Mr. Speaker, even if we were to believe that the Chief of Defence Staff and the generals were
plotting behind the minister’s back to lie to Parliament, to lie to Canadians, which is highly
unlikely, it would only prove that the Minister of National Defence is not in control of his
own department,” he ventured, his hands folded together in front of him. “However, the
Minister of National Defence knew the F-35 was a fiasco. The NDP, the Parliamentary Budget
Officer, media report after media report all highlighted the numerous problems with the plane
and its budgeting.”
Opening his hands and turning his palms upward, he posed the question(s). “When will the
Minister of National Defence finally stand up and take responsibility for the F-35 debacle?
Where is the accountability?”
The Prime Minister, his own hands folded in front of him, protested. “ Mr. Speaker,” he begged,
“of course the leader of the NDP is putting words into the Auditor General’s mouth that he
certainly never said.”
Specifically, the Auditor General’s office has expressed “significant concerns about the
completeness of cost information provided to parliamentarians.” “In March 2011, National
Defence responded publicly to the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s report. This response did not
include estimated operating, personnel, or ongoing training costs,” the report reads. ”Defence
told parliamentarians that cost data provided by US authorities had been validated by US
experts and partner countries, which was not accurate at the time. At the time of its response,
National Defence knew the costs were likely to increase but did not so inform
parliamentarians.”
Now Mr. Mulcair rose for a fourth time. . . . .
“Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence looked very much in charge when he climbed
aboard the F-35 for photo ops. He looked very much in charge when for months he was denying any
problems with the F-35,” he shot back, staring down the Prime Minister and wagging his finger
at Mr. MacKay. “Here is the bottom line: The Minister of National Defence had the
responsibility to know, the duty to find out and the obligation to tell the truth in
Parliament. Now that his Minister of National Defence has failed so miserably, why is he
refusing to act?”
Mr. Harper stood bearing talking points. “On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, the government is
acting on the recommendations of the Auditor General. The government has not acquired the
aircraft. The government has not signed a contract. The government has frozen the funds for
acquisition. The government will examine the process. The government has said it will set up a
separate and distinct secretariat and we will make sure there is independent verification
processes. That is how the government will proceed.”
The NDP leader called this out as “nonsense”— the Conservatives, he noted, are still “fully on
board” with the F-35. In response, the Prime Minister had assurances and, of course, a vow to
“make sure our men and women in uniform have the best equipment.”
Dean Del Mastro, the Prime Minister’s dutiful parliamentary secretary, gave this a one-man
standing ovation.
Mr. MacKay had remained seated for all of yesterday’s Question Period. And it was his
parliamentary secretary who was put in front of the television cameras afterwards to explain
the government’s position. And it was to Julian Fantino’s office that questions about what
Mr. MacKay knew — submitted by this writer — were directed earlier this afternoon.
But this afternoon, Mr. MacKay did stand. . . .
On the first appearance, in response to taunts from the NDP’s Matthew Kellway, he offered the
same sorts of reassurances the Prime Minister had offered. “The Auditor General has provided
conclusions and made recommendations, and we have accepted those,” he explained. “We will
continue now, with the guidance of Public Works, to move forward with a proper acquisition
process to replace the aging CF-18s.”
A total of seven Conservatives stood to applaud this.
^^^^^^
Mr. Kellway came back with a reference to shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.
Mr. MacKay stood for a second time. ”Mr. Speaker,” he said, “as was mentioned, with no contract
in place…”
In his seat across the way, Mr. Mulcair threw his hands in the air and stared at the Defence
Minister, appearing not sure whether to laugh, cry or scream.
“Mr. Speaker, let us look at the actual contract,” Mr. MacKay once demanded of an apparent
agreement that guaranteed 65 warplanes at a cost of $9 billion. “… no money misspent and now
funds frozen, we are injecting more accountability into this process,” Mr. MacKay declared. ”We
will move forward. That is our intention, to see the CF-18 aircraft replaced with a proper
aircraft. We will continue to make investments that support the men and women in uniform. I
would advise the member opposite to do the same.”
Indeed, the best way for Mr. Kellway to support the troops would seem to be that he forget any
of this ever happened.
The Stats. Military procurement, 20 questions. Ethics, four questions. Taxation, the CBC and
gas prices, two questions each. Employment, government services, the budget, the environment,
Rights & Democracy, Old Age Security, National Defence and oil tankers, one question each.
*******************************************************
"We CAN look after each other better than we do today.
We CAN have a fiscally responsible government.
We CAN have a strong economy; greater equality; a clean environment.
We CAN be a force for peace in the world." - Jack Layton
________________________________________________
. . . . but first we have to remove the Harper Conservatives from the seats of Government.
________________________________
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
The Commons: Accepting responsibilities without taking responsibility
The Scene. ”Who was responsible for the F-35?” Thomas Mulcair asked at the outset.
This was both straightforward and profound. A direct question, but a philosophical riddle. If a
massive abuse of procedure and accountability falls in the forest, but no one is named, blamed
and shamed as the culprit, did it ever really happen?
One is reminded of the moment last November when Tony Clement could not say precisely who had
broken the rules in the G8 Legacy Fund affair. “Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General is very clear
regarding the responsibilities in this respect,” the Prime Minister offered by way of response.
Mr. Mulcair seemed to feel a lesson was in order. Our parliamentary system, he said, is based
on the principle of ministerial responsibility. The minister is responsible for his ministry.
The Prime Minister is responsible for picking his ministers. ”Does the Prime Minister think,”
Mr. Mulcair wondered, “that the Defence Minister has done his job?”
“Yes,” Mr. Harper offered. “The government and ministers accept their responsibilities.”
The leader of the opposition was unsatisfied. . . .
“Mr. Speaker, even if we were to believe that the Chief of Defence Staff and the generals were
plotting behind the minister’s back to lie to Parliament, to lie to Canadians, which is highly
unlikely, it would only prove that the Minister of National Defence is not in control of his
own department,” he ventured, his hands folded together in front of him. “However, the
Minister of National Defence knew the F-35 was a fiasco. The NDP, the Parliamentary Budget
Officer, media report after media report all highlighted the numerous problems with the plane
and its budgeting.”
Opening his hands and turning his palms upward, he posed the question(s). “When will the
Minister of National Defence finally stand up and take responsibility for the F-35 debacle?
Where is the accountability?”
The Prime Minister, his own hands folded in front of him, protested. “ Mr. Speaker,” he begged,
“of course the leader of the NDP is putting words into the Auditor General’s mouth that he
certainly never said.”
Specifically, the Auditor General’s office has expressed “significant concerns about the
completeness of cost information provided to parliamentarians.” “In March 2011, National
Defence responded publicly to the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s report. This response did not
include estimated operating, personnel, or ongoing training costs,” the report reads. ”Defence
told parliamentarians that cost data provided by US authorities had been validated by US
experts and partner countries, which was not accurate at the time. At the time of its response,
National Defence knew the costs were likely to increase but did not so inform
parliamentarians.”
Now Mr. Mulcair rose for a fourth time. . . . .
“Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence looked very much in charge when he climbed
aboard the F-35 for photo ops. He looked very much in charge when for months he was denying any
problems with the F-35,” he shot back, staring down the Prime Minister and wagging his finger
at Mr. MacKay. “Here is the bottom line: The Minister of National Defence had the
responsibility to know, the duty to find out and the obligation to tell the truth in
Parliament. Now that his Minister of National Defence has failed so miserably, why is he
refusing to act?”
Mr. Harper stood bearing talking points. “On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, the government is
acting on the recommendations of the Auditor General. The government has not acquired the
aircraft. The government has not signed a contract. The government has frozen the funds for
acquisition. The government will examine the process. The government has said it will set up a
separate and distinct secretariat and we will make sure there is independent verification
processes. That is how the government will proceed.”
The NDP leader called this out as “nonsense”— the Conservatives, he noted, are still “fully on
board” with the F-35. In response, the Prime Minister had assurances and, of course, a vow to
“make sure our men and women in uniform have the best equipment.”
Dean Del Mastro, the Prime Minister’s dutiful parliamentary secretary, gave this a one-man
standing ovation.
Mr. MacKay had remained seated for all of yesterday’s Question Period. And it was his
parliamentary secretary who was put in front of the television cameras afterwards to explain
the government’s position. And it was to Julian Fantino’s office that questions about what
Mr. MacKay knew — submitted by this writer — were directed earlier this afternoon.
But this afternoon, Mr. MacKay did stand. . . .
On the first appearance, in response to taunts from the NDP’s Matthew Kellway, he offered the
same sorts of reassurances the Prime Minister had offered. “The Auditor General has provided
conclusions and made recommendations, and we have accepted those,” he explained. “We will
continue now, with the guidance of Public Works, to move forward with a proper acquisition
process to replace the aging CF-18s.”
A total of seven Conservatives stood to applaud this.
^^^^^^
Mr. Kellway came back with a reference to shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.
Mr. MacKay stood for a second time. ”Mr. Speaker,” he said, “as was mentioned, with no contract
in place…”
In his seat across the way, Mr. Mulcair threw his hands in the air and stared at the Defence
Minister, appearing not sure whether to laugh, cry or scream.
“Mr. Speaker, let us look at the actual contract,” Mr. MacKay once demanded of an apparent
agreement that guaranteed 65 warplanes at a cost of $9 billion. “… no money misspent and now
funds frozen, we are injecting more accountability into this process,” Mr. MacKay declared. ”We
will move forward. That is our intention, to see the CF-18 aircraft replaced with a proper
aircraft. We will continue to make investments that support the men and women in uniform. I
would advise the member opposite to do the same.”
Indeed, the best way for Mr. Kellway to support the troops would seem to be that he forget any
of this ever happened.
The Stats. Military procurement, 20 questions. Ethics, four questions. Taxation, the CBC and
gas prices, two questions each. Employment, government services, the budget, the environment,
Rights & Democracy, Old Age Security, National Defence and oil tankers, one question each.
*******************************************************
"We CAN look after each other better than we do today.
We CAN have a fiscally responsible government.
We CAN have a strong economy; greater equality; a clean environment.
We CAN be a force for peace in the world." - Jack Layton
________________________________________________
. . . . but first we have to remove the Harper Conservatives from the seats of Government.
welldone
Apr 5, 2012, 8:27:58 AM4/5/12
to
---
--> "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" <--
--> Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net <--
NDP@35%
Apr 5, 2012, 3:45:59 PM4/5/12
to
BOZO aka "welldone" aka Sheldon Scott aka Orion <well...@wellhoned.com> wrote in message
news:4u3rn7tr2bhbe2hm3...@4ax.com...
news:4u3rn7tr2bhbe2hm3...@4ax.com...
> --> "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" <--
> --> Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net <--
Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go.
> --> Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net <--
0 new messages