Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Chretien To Challenge Gomery's Findings


Recommended Posts

Chretien will challenge Gomery's findings and will let us taxpayer's off the hook this time around.

I think he has a very good chance of winning, as Gomery did make several comments that seemed to implicate Chretien before he even got on trial (i.e. "small town cheap.")

However, I doubt anyone in the current Liberal government cares, because by the time we know the result of Chretien's challenge Martin will either be leading a majority government or he will be in retirement.

As for Martin being exonerated, is anyone truly surprised? Martin said from day one if he was proved to be involved he would step down. He called the inquiry because he knew the only way to save himself from an annoying public would be to call this inquiry. He knew Chretien would be implicated as he ran the program from the PMO.

Martin got the last laugh in all of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Chretien will challenge Gomery's findings and will let us taxpayer's off the hook this time around.

I think he has a very good chance of winning, as Gomery did make several comments that seemed to implicate Chretien before he even got on trial (i.e. "small town cheap.")

I agree that Chretien ought to, and likely will, win. Gomery's behaviour and words have been pretty inappropriate for a sitting judge.

However, I doubt anyone in the current Liberal government cares, because by the time we know the result of Chretien's challenge Martin will either be leading a majority government or he will be in retirement.

That really depends on the circumstances of the case. If the Liberals are in a minority government, the destruction of all of Gomery's work could look pretty bad for them. They did, after all, call an expensive inquiry to clear the air. It would look kind of weak if the air gut thicker rather than clearer.

However, by the time that case gets done with, Canadians might be even more fatigued with "Adscam" than they currently are. In that case, the wrath of the electorate would fall on anyone still clamouring on about the issue. Given that Harper has picked this as his hill to die on, well... fate has a way of accomodating people, I guess.

If Chretien is successful in his challenge, the BQ will use it for maximum rhetorical gain. That could be bad.

As for Martin being exonerated, is anyone truly surprised?  Martin said from day one if he was proved to be involved he would step down.  He called the inquiry because he knew the only way to save himself from an annoying public would be to call this inquiry.  He knew Chretien would be implicated as he ran the program from the PMO.

The people that believe that the Finance minister is responsible for every penny of program spending are pretty surprised, as other threads here will demonstrate.

Martin got the last laugh in all of this.

I don't know. Pending the outcome of Chretiens challenge, it may well be that Chretien can still create a huge problem for Martin out of this. My candidates for last laugh are Chretien and Duceppe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Chretien will challenge Gomery's findings and will let us taxpayer's off the hook this time around.

I think he has a very good chance of winning, as Gomery did make several comments that seemed to implicate Chretien before he even got on trial (i.e. "small town cheap.")

I agree that Chretien ought to, and likely will, win. Gomery's behaviour and words have been pretty inappropriate for a sitting judge.

However, I doubt anyone in the current Liberal government cares, because by the time we know the result of Chretien's challenge Martin will either be leading a majority government or he will be in retirement.

That really depends on the circumstances of the case. If the Liberals are in a minority government, the destruction of all of Gomery's work could look pretty bad for them. They did, after all, call an expensive inquiry to clear the air. It would look kind of weak if the air gut thicker rather than clearer.

However, by the time that case gets done with, Canadians might be even more fatigued with "Adscam" than they currently are. In that case, the wrath of the electorate would fall on anyone still clamouring on about the issue. Given that Harper has picked this as his hill to die on, well... fate has a way of accomodating people, I guess.

If Chretien is successful in his challenge, the BQ will use it for maximum rhetorical gain. That could be bad.

As for Martin being exonerated, is anyone truly surprised?  Martin said from day one if he was proved to be involved he would step down.  He called the inquiry because he knew the only way to save himself from an annoying public would be to call this inquiry.  He knew Chretien would be implicated as he ran the program from the PMO.

The people that believe that the Finance minister is responsible for every penny of program spending are pretty surprised, as other threads here will demonstrate.

Martin got the last laugh in all of this.

I don't know. Pending the outcome of Chretiens challenge, it may well be that Chretien can still create a huge problem for Martin out of this. My candidates for last laugh are Chretien and Duceppe.

Usually the Finance Minister would be responsible, except that Chretien ran sponsorship out of the PMO.

If Chretien wins, he could get the last laugh. However, it would be difficult not to find some fault with his handling of all this. I am not saying he is personally corrupt, but he should have had more control over the corruption that did occur.

You are correct that all of this is good news for the Bloc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well he is entitled to as a citizen of Canada to a) challange allegations against him and

b ) be presumed innocent until proven guilty. He has a right to a fair trial under the court of law and a right to an appeal.

And although he swore a oath to tell the truth at the inquiry, he did not get a chance to have his laywers counter with their own questions to him. Nor did his laywers get a chance to question the other witnesses. And anyone can argue that the questions asked to him have a bias. This was an inquiry..not a court of law.

Who the hell knows at this point where this will go. But he is well within his legal right to appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure that when Chretien speaks, Martin won't look quite as lily-white clean.

Probably not. From Chretien's point of view, if he is going down, he is not going down alone.

But do you really think Martin was involved? Interesting OT question for this post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chretien has already made references to Martin's knowledge of the whole thing, but they may be out of anger! From what I read in the Gomery report, it seems the PMO had full control over this and the Finance dept had very little to do with the fine points of the program. According to Gomery, everything that Martin had his hands on had to be scrutinized by parliment first. If he wanted to okay this kind of spending, it would have gotten much more publicity. That is why, out of secrecy, Chretien handled these kind of things, so that the public was not enlightened to his spending unless it was a huge success in saving Quebec, and he could be crowned king of federation!! Chretien had always claimed his main goal was to keep Canada together. It is possible that Martin didn't have a hand in the actual filtration program, but he had to have a clue about what was going on!

It all seems kinda strange!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure that when Chretien speaks, Martin won't look quite as lily-white clean.

Probably not. From Chretien's point of view, if he is going down, he is not going down alone.

But do you really think Martin was involved? Interesting OT question for this post.

I have no idea. My belief is that Martin would have, at best, been on the fringe of it all. However, whether or not he was, Chretien coming out and accusing Martin will muddy the waters, and it won't be as easy for Martin to whitewash the whole thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Semperfi_dani,

But he is well within his legal right to appeal.
I don't know that 'appeal' is possible on an inquiry. What he could do is sue for slander. Like Mulroney did when he was accused of receiving kickbacks for helicopter contracts. However, Mulroney went on to serve as a director of a company in the US that was subsequently fined hundreds of millions for price fixing.
Archer Daniels Midland (ADM)

199?

  $100,000,000

ADM paid a $100 million fine and three of its executives --- Mark Whitacre, Mick Andreas and Terrance Wilson --- were sent to prison for fixing the price of lysine, a feed additive for livestock and poultry. http://www.ea1.com/CARP/

Archer Daniels Midland

Cerestar Bioproducts

Hoffmann-La Roche

Jungbunzlauer

Haarmann & Reimer

2001

$120,500,000 total

"The European Commission fined Hoffmann-La Roche AG, Archer Daniels Midland Co (ADM), Jungbunzlauer AG, Haarmann & Reimer Corp and Cerestar Bioproducts B.V. a total of $120.5 million for participating in a price-fixing and market-sharing cartel in citric acid." (Corporate Crime Reporter, Dec 5, 2001).

Archer Daniels Midland (ADM)

2004

$400,000,000

to settle price-fixing suit (June 21, 2004).

from... http://www.endgame.org/corpfines1.html

Once a crook, always a crook, I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course Chretien was unhappy with the Gomery inquiry; as he demonstrated in his speech Tuesday he's very disappointed that he received so little backpatting for "saving de country." Chretien felt that the inquiry should focus on the "saving de country" aspect of the program rather than the mismanagement.

-k

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't know many details of the sponsorship scandal, but when the finance minister of a country pleads ignorance of his governments spending habits, don't some of you find that just a teensy weensy bit ............ unbelievable??

Let common sense prevail please. Of course this is federal government we're talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I really don't know many details of the sponsorship scandal, but when the finance minister of a country pleads ignorance of his governments spending habits, don't some of you find that just a teensy weensy bit ............ unbelievable??
The only people who find it unbelievable are people who do not understand how organizations with multi billion dollar budgets work. The entire program was equivalent to $12/year from the perspective of someone who makes $40,000/year.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I really don't know many details of the sponsorship scandal, but when the finance minister of a country pleads ignorance of his governments spending habits, don't some of you find that just a teensy weensy bit ............ unbelievable??

Let common sense prevail please. Of course this is federal government we're talking about.

crazymf,

IF, as Martin claims, Chretien was running sponsorship from the PMO, then he was micromanaging it and it is likely that Martin left it for Chretien to deal with.

This is, of course, IF Chretien was running it from the PMO.

I do not think we will ever know if Martin truly knew because there is no way to prove it. Should he have known if he really didn't know? Well, you could argue either way. Technically as finance minister you handle much of the government money, but if your boss, the PM, says "I'll handle this one" then there isn't much you can do about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
crazymf,

IF, as Martin claims, Chretien was running sponsorship from the PMO, then he was micromanaging it and it is likely that Martin left it for Chretien to deal with.

This is, of course, IF Chretien was running it from the PMO. 

I do not think we will ever know if Martin truly knew because there is no way to prove it.  Should he have known if he really didn't know?  Well, you could argue either way.  Technically as finance minister you handle much of the government money, but if your boss, the PM, says "I'll handle this one" then there isn't much you can do about it.

There is also the concept of willful blindness. If Martin did have an inkling that something was wrong but avoided looking into it he could be found criminally responsible. Granted such a case would never see the light of day. Lucky, lucky Martin he will just have to go down as the second least successfully leader of the Liberals in the last century - come on down John Turner. At least PM jr. avenged PM sr. kinda .... :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The big problem, Crazy, is that Common Sense is prevailing. It is so evident in these discussions as it is in the public and the media.

But common sense is, as I think it was Wittgenstein who said: "Judgement without reflection."

Link to post
Share on other sites
crazymf,

IF, as Martin claims, Chretien was running sponsorship from the PMO, then he was micromanaging it and it is likely that Martin left it for Chretien to deal with.

This is, of course, IF Chretien was running it from the PMO. 

I do not think we will ever know if Martin truly knew because there is no way to prove it.  Should he have known if he really didn't know?  Well, you could argue either way.  Technically as finance minister you handle much of the government money, but if your boss, the PM, says "I'll handle this one" then there isn't much you can do about it.

There is also the concept of willful blindness. If Martin did have an inkling that something was wrong but avoided looking into it he could be found criminally responsible. Granted such a case would never see the light of day. Lucky, lucky Martin he will just have to go down as the second least successfully leader of the Liberals in the last century - come on down John Turner. At least PM jr. avenged PM sr. kinda .... :lol:

Yes I guess Harper could use the "you had the option" phrase again for Martin.

Martin even avenged Turner I would argue (although that wouldn't be too hard now, eh)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I guess Harper could use the "you had the option" phrase again for Martin.

Martin even avenged Turner I would argue (although that wouldn't be too hard now, eh)

If Harper could pull it off likely Mulroney did, doubtful but you never know, that could win the next election for him.

History has a way of making everybody look better. Four months before the election in 1984 Mulroney was in worse shape than Harper is in now. A good fact for all the Harper haters out there to remember....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I guess Harper could use the "you had the option" phrase again for Martin.

Martin even avenged Turner I would argue (although that wouldn't be too hard now, eh)

If Harper could pull it off likely Mulroney did, doubtful but you never know, that could win the next election for him.

History has a way of making everybody look better. Four months before the election in 1984 Mulroney was in worse shape than Harper is in now. A good fact for all the Harper haters out there to remember....

I like Harper as a person better than Mulrooney, but apparently people still like old bullsh*tters who spend money like drunk 15 year-old suburban girls at a shopping mall.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I guess Harper could use the "you had the option" phrase again for Martin.

Martin even avenged Turner I would argue (although that wouldn't be too hard now, eh)

If Harper could pull it off likely Mulroney did, doubtful but you never know, that could win the next election for him.

History has a way of making everybody look better. Four months before the election in 1984 Mulroney was in worse shape than Harper is in now. A good fact for all the Harper haters out there to remember....

I like Harper as a person better than Mulrooney, but apparently people still like old bullsh*tters who spend money like drunk 15 year-old suburban girls at a shopping mall.

(I apologize for that rather crude comment)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I like Harper as a person better than Mulrooney, but apparently people still like old bullsh*tters who spend money like drunk 15 year-old suburban girls at a shopping mall.

No apologies need. I found it kinda funny. :lol:

IF people are willing to give Harper a serious look then the party is looking really good this time around.

Sadly, that is a very big IF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The process is somewhat akin to an appeal, Thelonius. The Court reviews the findings of a Tribunal and makes a legal decision appropriate.

It may only be the ordering of a new hearing in view of misinterpretation at the original.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...