It seems that Peter Penashue accepted 28 different improper or illegal donations during the last election, and overspent his campaign by $47,000. You know, small change, and apparently he keeps claiming that it’s not his fault. Err, except that he signed off on all of it, and as the former Chief Electoral Officer said, those signatures mean something, and when the Elections Commissioner completes his investigation, this may yet result in criminal charges – albeit not before the by-election will be called, unfortunately. Laura Payton asks the outstanding questions about what happened in the Labrador election, and Peter Penashue’s resignation – most of it revolving around the money (most of which came from the party itself, it seems). Meanwhile, the former leader of the Newfoundland and Labrador Liberals has announced that she will contest the nomination for the Labrador by-election. She may yet have to battle Todd Russell for that nomination if he decides to throw his hat back in the ring.
Tag Archives: Peter Penashue
Roundup: Exit Penashue
In a surprising turn of events, Intergovernmental Affairs minister Peter Penashue resigned his seat after it was proved that he accepted improper political donations in the last election, which included free flights, an interest-free loan, and dressed up corporate donations. And then he paid back $30,000, which was more than the amount that the CBC had calculated, and they had no idea where the money came from, since the campaign was broke, hence the need for the loan. Penashue won by only 79 votes then, and plans to contest the nomination. His former Liberal Challenger, Todd Russell, has lately been fighting the Lower Churchill project because it hasn’t properly consulted with the Innu communities in the region, and is taking the next few days to consider if he’ll run again.
Roundup: A damning audit
Things on the Attawapiskat file got even more interesting yesterday with leaks of the independent audit of the band’s finances – the full report going online later in the day on the Aboriginal Affairs website. The gist – there was almost no due diligence with spending on the reserve, little to no documentation, and no way to tell if any of the money has been spent effectively. And remember that Spence’s partner is the band’s co-manager, whose job it is to handle the money. Spence has also known the audit’s results since August 28th, and has refused to comment to the audit firm about it. While it was due to be released no later than the middle of next week, the PM’s spokesperson denied that it had been withheld deliberately. And Spence? Shut out the media from her Victoria Island campsite while her spokesperson said that the audit was wrong and wondered about the timing of the release. Paul Wells notes that of all the leaders, past prime ministers and would-be leaders who’ve visited Spence, Thomas Mulcair was conspicuously absent, which may have turned out to be a prudent thing. Jonathan Kay parses the lessons inherent in that year-old CBC report on Attawapiskat, and applies them to the current situation. John Ivison looks at the audit, and the context of Theresa Spence’s ever-changing goal posts, while Andrew Coyne looks at the tensions in the Aboriginal community between those looking to modernise with incremental advancements the way the current government is proceeding with, and those who consider those advancements “genocide.”
Roundup: Back to the Ethics Commissioner
It’s Friday, and Stephen Harper is jetting off to Labrador to announce a loan guarantee for the Muskrat Falls hydro project – a project that embattled minister Peter Penashue has family ties with, which means he’s back to the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Commissioner’s office.
When Omnibus Budget Bill 2: The Revenge returns to the Commons, it’ll face between 26 and 47 votes on amendments put forward by the Greens. Kady O’Malley explains why the Speaker’s hands were tied when Scott Brison tried to point out the improper procedure employed in order to get some of his amendments back.
Over at the Natural Resources Committee, the Conservatives managed to work through the Liberal filibustering and have summoned David McGuinty and Justin Trudeau to appear before the committee to explain their “anti-Alberta” comments – not that McGuinty’s comments were anti-Alberta, and despite the fact that it offers both a platform to publicly denounce the job the government is doing in a public forum. But hey, it’s not like the committee has anything better to do than engage in a partisan witch-hunt.
QP: The return of tainted meat questions
It ended up being a week without the two main leaders facing off in QP, where Mulcair was again absent while Harper was back in the Chamber today. And despite there being three NDP deputy leaders in the House, they nevertheless decided to have Nycole Turmel read off the scripted question about a memo at CFIA about ignoring contaminated meat for non-Japan markets. Harper responded by saying that they ensure that meat is just as safe for Canadians as for the export market. Turmel then asked about cuts to inspections, to which Gerry Ritz responded this time, saying that they were enhancing the regulatory powers, and that the NDP voted against it. Malcolm Allen followed up with more of the same, this time in English, and got much the same from Ritz in response. When Bob Rae got up for the Liberals, he hammered away on the CFIA memo, not that Harper and Ritz responded any differently.
QP: Oh, those awful Liberals
Dear readers, you know that I normally have a pretty high tolerance for the shenanigans of Question Period on a daily basis. But today, that tolerance was sorely tested. This was nothing to do with decorum, but rather with the complete absence of substance in today’s debate. And as ugly of a day as it was, I nevertheless will give you the recap (and hope that my rage doesn’t boil over yet again while recounting the tale).
It began during Members’ Statements, when the Conservatives, one after another, stood up to denounce the Liberals because David McGuinty, in his frustration after a Natural Resources committee hearing, said that if the Conservatives were going to act provincially when it comes to resource development then they should run for municipal council or the provincial legislature. Apparently this was what the Conservatives needed to re-open the psychic wounds of the National Energy Programme (which they already conflate with other global market forces, but that’s another story) and woe be to the Liberal arrogance that has kept them from getting a seat in Western Canada lo these many years. They would all crowd around whichever Alberta MP was speaking, and fill the frame – even Blake Richards, who sits in the nosebleeds, they nevertheless got more Alberta MPs to crowd around behind him to fill the frame. Solidarity, and all of that. And the NDP? Well, Dan Harris declared that he was going to put “facts” on the table in the face of Conservative distortions about his party’s policies – and then proceeded to lay out the same talking points about corporate taxes that completely distort the way they work. Apparently one distortion deserves another.
QP: Pursuing peace and human rights
It was all hands on deck in the Commons today, for the first time in what seems like ages. Even the Bloc leader, Daniel Paillé was present – albeit from his perch in the diplomatic gallery, as he doesn’t actually have a seat. Thomas Mulcair kicked things off by reading off a question about the leaked proposed foreign policy plan, whereby the government would be abandoning their pledge not to sacrifice human rights on the altar of the almighty dollar. Harper stood up and in his usual shrugging manner, said the document wasn’t official policy and that his government always works to pursue peace and human rights. Mulcair went on to talk about the violence happening in the Congo, and the fact that Harper was just there talking about trade in the region. Harper disputed that characterisation, however, by saying that he did meet with opposition groups and expressed his concern over human rights abuses while at the Francophonie Summit in that country. Peggy Nash was up next, and wondered why Harper didn’t want to meet with the premiers when they were going to be discussing the economy. Jim Flaherty took this question, and pointed out that Harper regularly meets with the premiers. Bob Rae was up for the Liberals, and asked if Harper would consider doubling the flow of the gas tax to the municipalities by the next budget, so that they can engage in some long-term planning for infrastructure. Harper pointed out that they are consulting, but it was his government that made the gas tax transfers permanent, before the two of them had some back-and-forth over who can take credit for the gas tax revenues flowing to the cities.
QP: By-election questions in the House
With Stephen Harper off answering audience questions at the Canadian American Business Council’s fall policy conference, and John Baird over in the United Arab Emirates discussing the Gaza situation with his counterparts, it was up for grabs as to whose turn it was to be back-up PM du jour. So when Thomas Mulcair got up to read a pair of questions on Harper and Jim Flaherty contradicting each other’s deficit rounding error numbers, we found out that Tony Clement was the day’s designated hitter, who informed the House that it was their objective to balance the budget by 2015, and the NDP wants to raise taxes. Mulcair moved onto a question about why Harper wasn’t meeting with premiers in Halifax, what with the “fiscal cliff” looming and all, by Clement reminded everyone that the NDP wants to raise taxes. Peggy Nash tried to press after why Harper wasn’t meeting with the premiers, but this time Ted Menzies got to respond, reminding her that Harper meets with the premiers regularly. Bob Rae was up next, asking about a Calgary infrastructure project that was to have benefitted from an arrangement with P3 Canada, only to have the rules changed once the project was completed (and incidentally, this happened a year ago, and in the scrums afterward, Rae openly admitted that yeah, he’s asking these questions because there’s a by-election in Calgary Centre and god forbid there be politics in the House of Commons). Menzies accused Rae of having incorrect information, but did congratulate him on his concern for Calgary, and only wished that the Leader of the Official Opposition felt the same. For his final question, Rae asked about the situation in Gaza and working toward a cease-fire, to which Peter MacKay responded with a reaffirmation of the right of Israel to defend itself.
Roundup: Not taking all the blame
Peter Penashue’s former official agent isn’t willing to take the blame for all of the campaign spending overruns and curious donations, but he does seem to admit that there were some mistakes made in any case.
European negotiators are in town to make a final push toward completing the Canada-EU Trade Agreement.
The Privy Council Office was also interested in monitoring ethnic media – but they don’t seem to have been concerned about how the minister or Prime Minister were perceived.
Roundup: Another year of deficits
Jim Flaherty delivered his fiscal update yesterday, and what do you know? All of that global economic uncertainty and lowered commodity prices means that we’ll be in deficit for an additional year. Looks like all of those “wait until the budget is balanced” promises from the last election won’t happen before the next one. Meanwhile, Macleans.ca’s Econowatch explains the difference between the $5 billion and $7 billion deficit figures (which boils down to choosing optimistic or pessimistic forecasts), while economist Stephen Gordon says that Flaherty should pretty much stay the course (thanks in large part to the thicker cushion left to him by the debt reduction efforts of Paul Martin and company).
Embattled minister Peter Penashue didn’t hold a meeting yesterday as promised to explain the irregularities with his campaign spending and donations. Constituents were told they could write him if they have questions, while a one-question phone survey has been going around the riding about whether or not people would vote for him again. It’s all a bit odd. Penashue did put out a letter on his website, in which he pretty much blames his former Official Agent for everything, which is convenient, and would show negligence on his own part for not keeping an eye on things as the candidate who is ultimately accountable.