Zimbabwean pundit- another place that should be on the radar screen

via commenter maz2 at Being American in T.O.

What the media need to do is become less biased and more truthful

"Fratboy humor is, of course, one way to conceal the mainstream media's nervousness about the exploding popularity of blogs. "We're not in control, and we don't know it yet," said panelist Ken Sands, online publisher of The Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Wash.......


"The media needs to be more aggressive, because bloggers are coming at us," said Moss of Fox News. "Bloggers are aggressive, and the mainstream media needs to be more aggressive back."........

Jack's got a few comments on polls

From Jacksnewswatch

"The first comment I would like to make is that the poll is pure garbage. How do I know that? I know because I know how Conservatives are reacting to all the Liberal "Bull" that is being bandied about. Everytime one of these dumb pollsters calls a Conservative they hang up the phone. THEREFORE, the only people answering the polls are Liberals or NDP. THEREFORE, the result is totally scewed."

Lunchtime at Toronto City Hall-12:45pm, June 8/05

"Madison" and "Adams " join the Monarchist

Grit punditocracy....................

Nice place for a summer vacation........

Ralph Peters-Helping Africa

"If you want to reduce disease, educate the people. If you want to break down violent rivalries, provide unbiased education. If you want to build economies, train workers. If you want to foster democracy, promote literacy.

In short, if you want to help Africa stop being a basket case, concentrate ruthlessly on education. Let the Europeans do the feel-good projects. Let celebrities give away granola bars. Stick to the mission of helping people learn. .........

Africa's elites have stolen enough. If a country isn't serious about helping its people, our aid should go to states that genuinely want to make progress....



While we need to be wary of well-intentioned rock-star demands for hurling money into an African mosh pit, we're foolish not to do more for a continent whose awful press disguises enormous potential. If we give wisely now, we will profit greatly tomorrow.

Africa is as hungry for knowledge as it is for food. If we help provide the education, the continent will learn to feed itself. "

BRE- X............

"Canada has long carried a reputation as a haven for swindlers and stock promoters. In 1989, Forbes magazine labelled the Vancouver Stock Exchange the "scam capital of the world." We've never been able to shake that image, and Bre-X still stands as Exhibit A for those who consider this country an investment backwater of crooks, liars and ineffectual cops. That, more than anything, is what sustains our fascination with de Guzman: the nagging realization that no one has ever really been brought to justice for Bre-X. And, in all likelihood, no one ever will be.

The RCMP abandoned its criminal investigation in 1999, after spending almost two years reviewing more than 600,000 documents related to the case. The Mounties said there wasn't enough evidence to hope for a conviction. The six-year statute of limitations for securities violations and insider trading has also elapsed, so even civil charges against de Guzman are out of the question........





Even more depressing is the knowledge that it could all happen again. The scandal exposed weaknesses in the system that have never been fixed. Canada's police forces still lack the resources to track and prosecute sprawling frauds, and the various provincial market regulators remain uncoordinated, underfunded and undermanned.

Eight years have passed, and still the memory of Bre-X provokes shame and anger in this country. It made fools of us all: the analysts and journalists who breathlessly reported the faked results, the executives who clamoured to partner with Bre-X, the investors who got sucked in to the hype, and the authorities who were seemingly powerless to do anything about it.

Is Michael de Guzman dead or alive? Our abiding interest gives the answer. He is alive and well, living the high life somewhere . . . in our minds at least, if not in reality.

He always will be."

Question Period- Hansard excerpts- June 7/05

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, if every provincial government taxed like the federal government, they would go bankrupt pretty quickly.

The prestigious OECD is predicting that the Prime Minister's NDP inspired spending spree will result in interest rates being hiked. That means Canadians will be paying more for their mortgages, their credit card debts and the value of their homes may drop.

Why must ordinary Canadians bear the brunt of this flaccid Prime Minster's flagrant vote buying attempts to prop up his fraudulent corrupt government?

Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the bitterness of the hon. gentleman is palpable for the rest of Canadians to judge. The policies of the government have resulted in low and stable inflation rates and low and stable interest rates.

We have an established policy with the Bank of Canada which keeps inflation in that band between 1% and 3%. It is solidly within that range. It will stay within that range and that means interest rates in the country will continue to be stable and low.

Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, let us take a look at what some of those experts are saying. Those experts are predicting that interest rates are going to go up.

Nesbitt Burns said that with the passage of the two budget bills, the Bank of Canada would have no choice but to raise interest rates. Marc Lévesque, a senior strategist with TD Securities, said that the lavish spending promises made by the Prime Minister to win the support of the NDP would push the Bank of Canada to raise interest rates more quickly.

Instead of punishing ordinary Canadians, will the Prime Minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of his own personal agenda to desperately cling to power?

Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the repetition of a fallacious premise does not make it true. The spending profile difference before and after Bill C-48 is the grand total of 1%. Within the fiscal flexibility that was built into the framework on February 23, there is ample room to cope with the new spending initiatives of, as I say, barely 1%.

The Government of Canada has delivered for over a decade now the most fiscally responsible performance in the history of our country and we will stick by it.....
Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, on May 31, in response to a question about discussions between his chief of staff and a Conservative MP, the Prime Minister stated here in the House, “—the statement is absolutely clear that no offer was made, that an offer was solicited”. That is what he said.

I am asking the Prime Minister when he learned that an MP was soliciting an offer from his chief of staff in exchange for crossing the floor of the House. Was it during the negotiations between his chief of staff and the Conservative MP, or later, meaning once those negotiations had been made public?

Right Hon. Paul Martin (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again, the leader of the Bloc Québécois is referring to altered tapes. I can tell him that we acted on the basis that no offer would be made. Unlike the opposition, we are not making accusations of malfeasance about the opposition gratuitously.

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, they are not gratuitous. I will repeat what he said. The Prime Minister responded, and I quote, “—the statement is absolutely clear that no offer was made, that an offer was solicited”. Those are his words.

I am asking him if he learned of it before or after. In the first case, he should have called the RCMP; in the second, his chief of staff should have called them. When did he learn of it? I am repeating his words. It is not gratuitous. I am not accusing anyone. I am repeating his words. Now he needs to explain himself.

[English]

Hon. Tony Valeri (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said that he was informed the member for Newton--North Delta wanted to cross the floor. The Prime Minister said that no offer was to be made, and no offer was made.

[Translation]

Mr. Michel Guimond (Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister refuses to say when he was made aware of the offer made by the member. One thing is certain, however. He cannot claim that his chief of staff was not aware because, after he was approached, the chief of staff entered into negotiations. This, therefore, is proof that his chief of staff was aware but did not see fit to inform the RCMP.

Does the Prime Minister not think that he would be fully justified to call for the resignation of his chief of staff after this demonstration of such a flagrant lack of judgment?

¸ (1425)

[English]

Hon. Tony Valeri (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, no.

[Translation]

Mr. Michel Guimond (Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, BQ): Mr. Speaker, here in this House, the Deputy Prime Minister has shown us the way to approach such a matter, stating that anyone aware that a criminal act might be committed has a duty to inform the RCMP.

Does this apply to the PM's chief of staff? Since the chief of staff was obviously derelict in his duty, ought he not to resign immediately?

[English]

Hon. Tony Valeri (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the House numerous times before, the RCMP will decide whether there is anything to investigate in this matter. If the member opposite has any information, then he should provide it to the RCMP, and I would encourage him to do so.

Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the OECD has raised a red flag on out of control Liberal-NDP spending, which it says will hike interest rates. That means a lower standard of living for all Canadians, for all Canadian workers and all Canadian families.

How many red flags have to stick this Prime Minister right in the eye before he decides to dump his deal with the dippers?

Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, when the precursors of the hon. gentleman's party were in government they delivered an economic performance that resulted in the world's observers saying that Canada had become a candidate for membership in the third world. That is the Conservative legacy.

We eliminated that legacy. We balanced the budget. We have delivered eight consecutive surpluses. We have the best fiscal performance in all of the G-7 and it is going to stay that way.

¸ (1430)

Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, CPC): Mr. Speaker, according to Don Drummond, a former deputy finance minister, Canadians have not seen a rise in their take-home pay since this government took power. I think that is pretty damning.

A 2% hike in interest rates on a $200,000 mortgage would mean a $230 increase in monthly mortgage payments. That is a disaster for working Canadians. Will the Prime Minister dump his deal with the NDP so that Canadians can pay their mortgages?

Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I take it from the previous remarks of the hon. gentleman that he is a great fan of the fiscal policies applied by the United States of America. I would point out to the hon. gentleman that in that country interest rates are rising. In this country, interest rates are low and stable.........

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC): Mr. Speaker, rent scam goes right to the top. Top sources revealed to my office documented proof today that taxpayers started paying rent on the empty Gatineau building two months before a contract was even signed. That is right. The first payday was December 1, 2003, and the deal was inked on January 28, 2004.

Why did the current finance minister, the then public works minister, pay half a million dollars in rent to a Liberal--

The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Public Works and Government Services.

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize that, first of all, this lease was awarded and the contract was awarded after a fair, open and transparent process, and in fact, a process that was overseen by a fairness monitor, that fairness monitor being KPMG.

It is also important to recognize that yesterday in this House the hon. member attacked the new conflict of interest code for senators. It is important to recognize that this code of conduct is in fact supported by Conservative senators. He is offside with his own party membership in the Senate and I suggest that they get on the same page and talk at caucus tomorrow about this important issue.

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Nepean—Carleton, CPC): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the finance minister, who was the public works minister at the time that his government started paying rent for an empty building without even signing a contract. Why is it that this minister paid a half a million dollars to the company of a Liberal senator, without a contract?

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, further, the contract was signed before the individual was in fact a member of the Senate.

Further, I would draw the member's attention to what Senator David Angus has to say about the new conflict of interest code for senators. This is what a Conservative senator is saying: “This conflict of interest code for senators is a remarkable document”. He says that it is the result “of a long and thoughtful but arduous labour by many of our honourable colleagues”. He goes on to say that “our code is much better than the one that was adopted earlier this year in the other place”.

I hope that tomorrow at caucus the hon. member speaks to his Senate colleagues and urges them to get on the same page.

Mr. Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, CPC): Mr. Speaker, this minister is avoiding the question. On May 31, the public works minister admitted to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates that their Liberal landlord had broken the Parliament of Canada Act in a deal to rent his building to this government.

What he did not admit is that taxpayers had been paying rent months before the contract was signed. Is it normal procedure for this government to pay out taxpayers' money before a contract is signed or is this a special deal for his Liberal colleagues?

¸ (1440)

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, to clarify, as I clarified at committee, what I referred to at committee was the fact that when we as the department became aware of the situation, I instructed our department to write to Alexis Nihon. The letter simply said:

We would like to know...what arrangements...you have taken to ensure that you are in compliance with the Lease...Please inform us...of what corrective measures you have taken to arrange your affairs in such a way that you are not in breach of section 25.10 of the Lease.

We took action. Section 25.10 in fact refers to section 14 of the Parliament code. That code no longer exists. There is a new code of ethics and we are confident that in fact all--

The Speaker: The hon. member for Vegreville—Wainwright.

Mr. Leon Benoit (Vegreville—Wainwright, CPC): Mr. Speaker, this government only acts when it is caught red-handed. It took the opposition to blow the whistle and catch the government's breach of the Parliament of Canada Act. The penalty for breaking this law is $200 a day, which now is $110,000 in total. When will the government collect this fine from its Liberal colleague?

Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again, the hon. member is simply not up on his facts. In terms of the $200 a day fine he is referring to, that fine no longer exists, in fact. It is part of section 14. Section 14 was replaced by the code of conduct, which I believe this Parliament approved in 2003, and beyond that, a conflict of interest code for the Senate that is supported by the Conservative senators.

If those members have a complaint to launch about a senator's conduct, they should talk to their Conservative senators about making that complaint to the Senate ethics commissioner.