Hire a person facing criminal charges? YES, say BC Libs

[rustled]

We can continue to split hairs here; however, the issue was whether or not Laura Miller 'stepped down/took a Leave of Absence/or RESIGNED. It now appears clear that she did in fact RESIGN.

This is why the term 'REHIRED' has been used rather than to say Laura Miller has 'resumed/returned to' her position. And nowhere have I said it was wrong of the BC Liberal Party to 'rehire' her. It does show that they are not particular about the ethical standards they display though.....

Yes, that makes sense. I do think, though, that if any employee had been doing a good job at what she'd been initially hired to do, it would be fair to have her resume that position when she'd dealt with whatever she needed to deal with. You'll read into this that "they're not particular", and perhaps that's true, but it's also quite possible she is simply very good at what she does and the process to date has shown she's likely to be cleared, in which case the employer is being fair.

You'd have them wait to reinstate her, and if the Liberals were only concerned with optics that's exactly what they should have done. Perhaps, though, optics are not the most important thing at play. Let's put it this way: I'd find it more offensive if, at the end of the day, it turned out the Liberals had chosen to let her swing in the wind just for the sake of optics.

[Hurtlander]

I would consider that to be manufacturing and distorting reality to fit a predetermined intense dislike (some would say an irrational hatred) of Premier Clark which has little to do with Ms Miller.

Again, you've lost all sense of reality. Exactly how is posting a link to a news story which fits perfectly with the title of this thread, from one of Canada's leading major news organizations, considered in any way shape or form to be manufacturing or distorting reality?
As far as I'm concerned, exposing actual documented questionable acts by Christy Clark and her inner circle is a whole heck of a lot more legitimate and real than the comments you've posted on a regular basis about what you speculate Justin Trudeau may or may not do.

[flamingfingers]

Listen to Vaughn Palmer on CKNW Jon McComb's show regarding Miller's 're-hire':

"They are so arrogant.." "They don't care what people think...."

http://northerninsights.blogspot.ca/

[rustled]

It's interesting that "what people think" should matter so much. Popular opinion is certainly gaining strength. It put French's ketchup back on Loblaws shelves, but it remains to be seen whether reversing what ought to have been a fact-based business decision, just to appease the outraged public, was a good choice.

It seems to me that doing what's right should always be more important than doing what's popular at this moment in time. Yes, it may be seen by some as the height of arrogance to ignore popular opinion, especially when it's all about someone they don't like, even when that person is doing something about which the public doesn't yet have all the details. Others who have no particular bias may see it as being principled in the face of public pressure, and feel that until this woman's case has been tried, it's fair that she's treated without a presumption of guilt and that it's fair we're not privy to all the details of her case.

The public is free to convict Miller without hearing the evidence. Popular opinion is free to say she shouldn't have been rehired to the position regardless of the circumstances. And once the case is heard, it may be that she ought not to have been rehired. But deciding such things on "what people might think" at this point hardly seems the principled thing to do.

[Donald G]

Unread postby rustled » Yesterday, 9:22 pm

It seems to me that doing what's right should always be more important than doing what's popular at this moment in time.

As usual rustled you are right on the money.

Unfortunately doing the right thing means doing far different things to different people.

[Rwede]

Are you now saying when a young Adrian Dix altered a document to protect his employer it was not a big deal, just business as usual?

I still find it beyond hilarious that some NDPers think that 35 years old is young and reckless.

Really?






Back to the ChristyLiberals and the McGuintyLiberals and the JustinLiberals.

We should start a poll to see which one has/had the most scandals and corruption.

They are all the same party, really, so it's pretty much a race to see who can rack up the best (worst?) record on malfeasance.

[Hurtlander]

I still find it beyond hilarious that some NDPers think that 35 years old is young and reckless.

First of all, I am not an NDPer, nor am I supporting what Dix did. Secondly, I mistakenly thought Dix was in his early 20's at the time, that's why I used the word "young".

[ferri]

*stay on topic please! thank you!

[Donald G]

Given that the only thing separating a resounding yes from a resounding no is a value judgement expressed as an unsubstantiated opinion it is inevitable that those supporting the two BC political parties will arrive at opposite opinions regarding whether a political position should be filled by a person facing criminal charges should be hired or not.

One thing that is clear is that the political affiliation of the person facing charges or having pleaded guilty by paying a voluntary penalty is the primary factor in the decision. That's politics for you.

[The Green Barbarian]

*removed*