Trudeau Government Accused of Ethics Breach

[Rwede]

Trudeau Government Accused of Ethics Breach After Pressuring Judge to Resign

By Justin Ling

February 2, 2016 | 11:25 am


Canada's opposition made political hay on Tuesday over letters sent from Justin Trudeau's government to a host of sitting judges, asking that they step down.

Those letters may break federal ethics guidelines, and a possible violation of those rules has led to the opposition Conservative Party calling for minister's head.

The controversy amounts to the first ethics scandal of Trudeau's nascent government, which campaigned heavily on accountability and transparency.

Government House Leader Dominic LeBlanc defended himself Tuesday, telling the House of Commons that "writing to a government official about a specific appointment is different than writing to a government official about a specific issue."

The Conservatives, however, continued to target the government over the letters.

"Political interference is political interference," said Karen Vecchio, Conservative Member of Parliament for Elgin—Middlesex—London, during Question Period on Tuesday. "In the past, this exact issue has caused Liberal ministers to resign."

Rest of article:
http://news.vice.com/article/trudeau-go ... -to-resign

[fluffy]

This sounds like lawyering, and in a situation where the word of the law might not jive with what is morally right or wrong. Patronage appointments by a government in fear of losing their place at the helm aren't exactly what would qualify as morally right, but this issue will come down to the rules as they are written. At first glance, the wording looks clear in that a minister would be out of line to interfere with the functioning of the various courts, tribunals and judicial committees. Now whether or not the appointment of people to those judicial bodies falls under the "functioning" of those committees remains to be seen.

[Rwede]

Appointing judges to tribunals is lawful and ethical.

Pressuring judges to resign is unlawful and unethical.

Trying to apologize for the beloved Liberals' attempts to circumvent the legal system in this country in order that they may get "Liberal friendly" judges and supporters into these positions is morally bankrupt.

[fluffy]

Appointing judges to tribunals is lawful and ethical.

That's the question isn't it? If these appointments were personal favours from the Harper government and not based on any specific need or on any special qualifications on the part of the appointee then "ethical" becomes an arguable point. It would also be the question that holds most interest for the public, don't you think?


There is also some gray area around whether or not questioning those appointments is actually interfering with the functioning of those judicial bodies. A sharp lawyer could possibly make a distinction between the two as any cases they may be considering would be at arm's length from the appointment question. Definitely lawyer territory.

[Rwede]

That's the question isn't it? If these appointments were personal favours from the Harper government and not based on any specific need or on any special qualifications on the part of the appointee then "ethical" becomes an arguable point. It would also be the question that holds most interest for the public, don't you think?

I don't think you read the article. The vast majority of these appointments were renewals of terms for people already in these positions.

[Bsuds]

I don't think you read the article. The vast majority of these appointments were renewals of terms for people already in these positions.

It would be interesting to know how many were appointed by Harper in the first place.

[Rwede]

It would be interesting to know how many were appointed by Harper in the first place.

It would be interesting to know how many were appointed by Chretien and Trudeau Sr in the first place.

Or not.

Because it doesn't really matter when a Liberal politician illegally tries to get a judge to resign because he fears that judge may not hold the same political views as said politician.

[Bsuds]

How many Conservatives have been assigned to positions in the last 10 years because they did?

As to it being illegal I just consider that most or all Politicians are on the shady side of legal in the first place.

[Rwede]

How many Conservatives have been assigned to positions in the last 10 years because they did?

Doesn't matter. It was within the law. If you have a problem with that law, work to get it changed. We can't fault politicians who operate within the confines of the laws of our country - we can fault a law that we feel should be changed, and it's our fault if we don't work to change it.

What is unlawful is when a politician, Liberal in this case, pressures judges.

[Bsuds]

Don't much care and was just curious about how and by whom they were appointed in the first place.

Maybe we should stop appointing Judges and Senators etc and they should be voted into office.

[Veovis]

Don't much care and was just curious about how and by whom they were appointed in the first place.

Maybe we should stop appointing Judges and Senators etc and they should be voted into office.

That hasn't worked as great in the US in my opinion.

[flamingfingers]

Doomed Harper government made 49 “future” patronage appointments
By Elizabeth Thompson | Nov 23, 2015 4:30 am | 20 comments | Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on RedditPrint this page
Stephen Harper

Former Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s cabinet quietly stacked government agencies and Crown corporations with dozens of “future appointments,” and early appointment renewals in the dying days of its regime, many of which were only scheduled to go into effect long after the Conservatives were defeated, iPolitics has learned.

While some had been due to come up for renewal in November and December, others were renewed up to a year in advance of when they had been scheduled to expire and made effective the date the appointees’ current term was due to end.

For example, Mark O’Neill’s term as director of the Canadian Museum of History wasn’t scheduled to expire until June 2016. Last June, Harper’s cabinet renewed his $212,700 to $250,200 a year job for five years, effective June 2016.

John Badowski’s appointment as chairman of the Transportation Appeal Tribunal was renewed July 28. The renewal takes effect Jan. 1, 2019, and runs until July 29, 2020. The position currently pays between $174,700 and $205,500.

A review by iPolitics of order in council appointments by the Harper government found 49 appointments were made in recent months but scheduled to only take effect after the Oct. 19 election. Of the 49 appointments, 15 went into effect between election day and November 22. Six take effect today.

More here:
http://ipolitics.ca/2015/11/23/doomed-h ... ointments/

[Ken7]

What I find interesting is most of the lawyers appointed to be Judges that I have crossed seem to be Liberal card holders. Funny, now they wish to clean house, not sure what is on their mind now.

I would suggest it won't be good!

[flamingfingers]

^^Link to your claim please?

[Buckeye19]

Rwede:

Are you saying these are the same ol' lying, deceiving, disgusting Liberals we have always known?

To quote Jim Lahey: "A sh*t leopard never changes it's spots."