AG: $3.1 Billion on anti-terror spending can't be accounted for

Auditor General Michael Ferguson released his annual spring report which found lack of information to be the theme of the Conservatives' program spending. Included in this analysis is $3.1 billion in funding for anti-terrorism which can't be accounted for and off the radar. In times of economic uncertainty and austerity, can the Conservatives really afford to lose $3.1 billion without having it accounted for?

The spring report concluded an evaluation and better tracking of program spending is necessary to make sure taxpayer money is used efficiently. The document contained 11 chapters with a central theme emphasizing a lack of information.

The Public Security and Anti-Terrorism (PSAT) Initiative will need a government wide review after Ferguson found departments had spent $9.8 billion of the allocated $12.9 billion between 2001 and 2009 on security and anti-terrorism measures. The Treasury Board nor the AG could account for where the other $3.1 billion went.

"It's a matter of missing that last link in putting that information together," Ferguson said at a press conference adding that if the money were transfered to another program, it should have been documented.

"We don’t have enough information to say whether that happened," he said.

The NDP pounced the Conservatives for mismanagement of taxpayer money.

"It is really scandalous that [the government] can't account for the $3.1 billion," NDP MP Malcolm Allen said.

Treasury Board minister Tony Clement defended his record saying that Parliament was aware of how every nickel and dime was spent.

"All government spending, every nickel and dime is reported to Parliament and accounted for each and every year in the public accounts," he said, adding that he accepts recommendations for clearer documentation and representation of all spending.

The report found other troubling issues with the way the government has been keeping conduct.

• The Department of National Defense doesn't always carry through with the required security clearances with individuals and companies who take government contracts.
• The Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the government have no plan and haven't been acting to end disputes over the Aboriginals' residential school system.
• The Canadian Diabetes Strategy has been mismanaged by Health Canada and the impact of the program is unknown.
• The Canada Revenue Agency lost $29 billion in unpaid taxes.
• Money going to developmental aid is missing a paper trail and hence its management and results are questionable.
• Personnel shortages and old machinery act to hinder search and rescue capacity.
• Human Resources has improved on cutting Employment Insurance over-payments but is still millions in the red.

The revealing of mismanagement in the anti-terrorism program come in light of a week filled with discussion on the topic. The Conservatives tried to use the discourse to wedge into Liberal leader Justin Trudeau's support and their attacks backfired and were out of context.

WATCH: Stephen Harper on Terrorism: Best of judgement or nothing but political opportunity?

Meanwhile, controversy also surrounds the replacement of aircraft for the search and rescue program. The earliest a contract for new planes will be signed is next year and in the meantime money will be wasted on maintaining and upgrading the current fleet. 

MacKay too commented that he will accept recommendations in the report. "The reality is that while the process is underway it has not delivered the aircraft that we need," he said.

"Overall, we found many areas where the government should improve on the results that it achieves with taxpayers' dollars," Ferguson said.

Ferguson cites "significant weaknesses" in program evaluation for misguided decisions that have cost taxpayers. "As a result, decisions have been made about programs and related expenditures with incomplete information on their effectiveness," said Ferguson.

Canada's Human Resources Department hasn't even evaluated their ongoing grant and contribution programs for the next five years.

On Canada's efforts to reduce world poverty, an expense of $5.2 billion, Ferguson said "Decision makers do not have all the information they would need to determine that the conditions in the act are respected." In other words, Canadians spent $5.2 billion on a program that may not even have worked.

The sluggish rate of processing at the Department of Human Resources costs $10 million and is horribly inefficient. This is in the same department that decided to make it more difficult for Canadians to access Employment Insurance, something all workers and bosses pay into to ensure a safety net for those who get laid off.

It is clear mismanagement and a lack of information are costing taxpayers billions per year and in times of economic uncertainty and austerity, the Conservatives have opted for blind cuts behind closed doors. Perhaps if the Conservatives were accountable and did their work properly, they could make cuts in programs based on terms of waste and not on actual services. At this rate, cuts aren't benefiting the economy and waste is still rampant.

Given the Conservatives will try to offload the blame for their mismanagement elsewhere as they usually do, keep in mind that the Conservative Party intends to spend anywhere between $175 to $29,050 of taxpayers money on ads against Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, something that taxpayers shouldn't pay for, rather something the Conservatives should shell out of their own pockets.

Given the Conservatives' lack of accountability and now lack of accounting of over $3.1 billion in anti-terrorism measures alone, how believable are their ads that tout their steady hand? What do you think of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's judgement allowing policy makers to do their work blind and waste billions of taxpayer dollars? Share this article, inform your friends of where their money is actually going and join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre: "The root cause of terrorism is terrorists."

The Conservative government came out swinging at Liberal leader Justin Trudeau again Thursday about statements he made on terrorism. Meanwhile, the Conservatives had some statements of their own. Prime Minister Stephen Harper said it wasn't the time to "commit sociology" and his MP Pierre Poilievre said "The root cause of terrorism is terrorists."

The Conservatives are still at it, spending more time attacking Trudeau than actually dealing with terrorists. The Conservative approach appears to state that rather than try to prevent terrorism, the role of the government is to arrest the terrorists. The Conservative approach believes that rather than learn from an attack and apply the knowledge to providing better tools to the police and immigration officials, the solutions and ways to deal with such a complex and dangerous act are as simplistic as saying that "the root cause of terrorism is terrorists."

Thursday, Prime Minister Stephen Harper took another desperate swipe at Justin Trudeau. In Trinidad, Harper told a press conference that terrorist attacks are not a time to "commit sociology."

"I think, though, this is not a time to commit sociology, if I can use an expression," Harper said. "These things are serious threats, global terrorist attacks, people who have agendas of violence that are deep and abiding threats to all the values our society stands for.

"I don't think we want to convey any view to the Canadian public other than our utter condemnation of this kind of violence, contemplation of this violence and our utter determination through our laws and our activities to do everything we can to prevent it and counter it," Harper said.

On CBC's Power and Politics, just hours after Harper's statement, MP Pierre Poilievre was asked to clarify his comments.

"Nothing, but that's not the issue," he responded. Poilievre said Trudeau mishandled his response to the Boston bombings.

"When Peter Mansbridge looked Trudeau in the eye and said there's just been an attack in Boston, you're Prime Minister, what do you do?

"The right answer would have been: I'll immediately contact the RCMP and CSIS to ensure there are no threats in Canada. I checked with border services to see if anyone has passed the border that we need to be concerned about. I've contacted the White House to offer collaboration in preventing any further attacks and capturing the perpetrators. I publicly condemn the evil that has been undertaken and I make sure there are services provided for officials in the United States and to any Canadians potentially effected. That would have been the right answer."

While the Conservatives seemed focused on root causes, Trudeau's interview went beyond root causes.

"First thing, you offer support and sympathy and condolences and can we send down EMTs as we contributed after 9/11. Is there any material - immediate - support we have?" Trudeau said.

Peter Mansbridge told Trudeau that the Americans were moving people as a safety precaution in case the attack was something larger. The question then became: would you pick up the phone and call the RCMP, CSIS and border control, armed forces?

"Of course," Trudeau responded instantaneously, "I would be worried about what specific targets there are, but there will always be more targets, more shopping centers, more public events, more gatherings than we can evacuate or we can deal with. Yes, there is a need for security and and response and being proactive and making sure we have information but we also need to make sure that as we go forward we don't emphasise a culture of fear and mistrust."

However both Harper and Poilievre dismissed the situation, Harper saying there's no need to "commit sociology" and Poilievre, once perused by Power and Politics Host Evan Solomon, gave an interesting response.

"The root causes of terrorism is terrorists," Poilievre said. "That's how we respond."

While the Conservatives currently try to condemn any talk of root causes, Defence Minister and British Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron have referred to root causes in the past.

Upon responding to terrorist attacks in Norway in 2011, MacKay said, "in a demonstration of, to use your word the volatility that's still there, the vigilance we have to demonstrate, persevere and work together to find the root causes but also pre-empt and interrupt these types of attacks.

At the 2011 Munich Security Conference, British Prime Minister David Cameron told the conference, "We have got to get to the root of the problem, we need to be absolutely clear on where the origins of where these terrorist attacks lie."

Given the context of the controversy surrounding the root causes of terrorism, do you agree with Trudeau or Harper? Would you say Stephen Harper's stance on terrorism is the best of judgement or nothing but political opportunity? Share this article, inform your friends of where their money is actually going and join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Conservatives to use taxpayer money to attack Trudeau

If the Conservatives couldn't have stooped to a new low, according to a leaked document, they are now planning to use our money and Parliamentary mail privileges to distribute their petty and pathetic attacks against Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau. As a taxpayer, it is appalling to learn the money that is shelled out is going to go to petty politics the Conservative Party can pay for themselves. This alone should be met with an electoral loss in 2015, Harper is in way over his head.

In a document received by the Liberal Party, the Conservative Party plans to kick off the campaign June 1 and use between $175 to $29,050 in taxpayer money to say Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is "in way over his head."

The Liberals have responded, Democratic Reform critic Stephane Dion said “It’s so disrespectful of taxpayers’ money.”

Dion went on to attack Harper's latest attack, contrasting Trudeau's ads which released today with the ads we are about to see from the Conservatives.

“We are spending party money to deliver a positive message to Canadians,” Dion said, “when they are using your taxpayer money to send another negative, nasty message. And it shows a lot the difference between the two approaches for Canadians.”

The Conservatives defended their plan to use taxpayer money to fund their campaign stating.

"It's entirely appropriate for Canadians to be informed about those contrasting aspects of leadership they have available," Government House Leader Peter Van  said, adding the flyers don't break any rules.

Liberal House Leader Dominic Leblanc blasted the Tories for "wasting taxpayers' dollars" on "an unflattering, silly attack ad." He continued by saying that "If there's no rule that says you shouldn't use taxpayers' resources to distribute partisan attack ads, then we need to change the rules."

The document attained by the Liberals can be seen here.

It is one thing to run scared and attack Trudeau with Conservative funds, it's another to use taxpayers' hard earned cash. The level of desperation in the Conservative party wreaks as Labrador spells trouble for former MP Peter Penasue who resigned because he broke the law, but somehow thinks he deserves a second chance in a byelection set to take place May 13. Recent polls show Liberal Yvonne Jones has a 40 point lead at least over Penasue. While Stephen Harper claims Penasue has done the most work for the region, one must question a man who backs someone who broke the law while claiming to be tough on crime.

The level of desperation comes as Canadians grow tired of Harper's arrogance, ignorance and misguided policies - not to mention the jobs plan that is nothing but an overblown ad campaign. You can't run from lies forever, and the lies certainly exploded when the IMF said Canada was the weakest of 20 countries outside of Europe economically. This coming from a party who told Canadians they were the best to guide us through rough seas and from the same party that won in 2006 on a campaign of transparency and legitimacy.

Where is the transparency in blocking the Parliamentary Budget Officer's access to budgetary information? Where is the legitimacy in using taxpayer money in their own partisan ads? They might as well be shoving that  $175 to $29,050 in expenditures into their pockets because spending it on partisan ads amounts to the exact gesture. Corrupt in its nature and shamelessly desperate for a government that supposedly has a track record, or as they are spelling out: a lack of one.

The Conservatives have tried to pin Trudeau as "in way over his head" but given the fact that the footage used to make the video ads were used without the permission of the Huffington Post who owns the footage and just the fact that the Conservatives claim responsibility for the economy shows just how in over their heads they really are.

The Conservatives love to attack the Liberals and NDP on fiction. Let's take a look at taxes. Harper has spent millions on ads to tell us the Government of Canada is doing everything it can to keep taxes low and Conservatives will argue that the GST was cut by 2% but the reality is that the Conservatives raised taxes. They raised EI premiums and hence taxed jobs. They raised tariffs on virtually everything - ironically expected to be in effect in 2015 when they likely expect to lose the election.

In the meantime the Conservatives accomplished nothing apart from cyber-bullying tactics they now claim to be fighting. How are personal attacks on Stephane Dion, Michael Ignatieff, Thomas Mulcair and now Justin Trudeau any different than the tactics schoolyard bullies use to try to quell their victims?

There is only a handful of topics that can come to mind in this article and each of the links included take us back to those times to remind us of what the Conservatives really stand for. It is a shame that a party can grow so out of touch with its country that rather than focus on the principles it was elected on, it focuses on the unbelievably pathetic tactics it has to turn the spotlight on their opposition. Many Canadians support the downsizing of government, want accountability, want real criminals to face justice and prudent fiscal ideals, but it turns out the Conservatives had their own plans, creating new bureaucracies, centralizing all control to the PMO and allegedly breaking election laws left right and center.

There is no reason you shouldn't be outraged the Conservatives plan to use taxpayer funds to launch personal and partisan attacks and it doesn't matter who you support - even if you are a Conservative. The fact that money meant to go to parliamentary updates and public services is about to go to a 10-percenter flyer campaign is outright pathetic and unethical. It goes against every ounce of transparency and good governance the Conservatives once preached  It appears the Conservatives have lost the moral authority to govern and now their aim is to turn Canada into a vicious playground. The only proper way to respond to this kind of abuse of taxpayers' money is to send the Conservatives packing in the next election.

What do you think of Harper's plan to use taxpayer money to launch a partisan attack on Liberal leader Justin Trudeau? Should the Conservative government be punished for such an abuse? Share this article, inform your friends of where their money is actually going and join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Liberal ads attempt to change the channel on Conservative tactics

One week after the Conservatives launched a major "he's in over his head" campaign to congratulate Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, the Liberals have released their first ads to counter. The ads are in English and French and both center around the message of change and hard work. While the ads change the channel on messaging techniques, could they have been improved?

The English ad puts Trudeau in the classroom dismissing the Conservative ad against him by turning off the TV. He then goes on to take pride in being a teacher and says he will work hard to win over Canadians' trust.

The French ad brings in a different image, in fact, arguably aspects of the French ad should have been in the English one as well. While the French ad speaks more of values than service like the English ad, it had two things the English ad didn't. First, it had images of Trudeau's achievements, which could have overlayed his English message of service just as well as it did the French message of values and change. However while the photo overlay would have been a nice feat, the ending of the French ad speaks more to branding and should be everywhere.

The ending of the French ad, at 28 seconds in, is a montage of pictures with a consistent music theme that all come together to write the word Justin. Each of these pictures are of Trudeau with Canadians and if placed on all ads would go a long way to marketing his brand.

While Trudeau's response was classy and positive, it could have been more standardized in that some kind of branding was introduced. While there is no doubt that his name and his party are well known and well branded, it is the small and consistent and obvious details of an ad that will go a long way to getting a message or idea to stick in your head. This is mainly the reason why past Conservative attack ads were so successful.

As far as strategy is concerned, when a Republican strategist who worked with Harper long before his mandate was asked on CTV's Question Period how to deal with strategies. He said Harper's ads would backfire if they were untruthful and Trudeau's response should start by being positive and should also work on addressing important issues like the economy, taxes and trade.

Up to date, Harper's ads have fueled Liberal fundraising efforts and these ads prove to be a refreshing change of channel when it comes to political messaging in this country.

For those that haven't seen the Conservative ads, they feature clips of Justin Trudeau at a charity event - HuffingtonPost said the Conservatives had no permission to use their footage - along with carnival music and footage from a CTV interview where Trudeau mimicked Quebec separatists to make a point in his argument. With this and many other controversies, it is safe to say Harper branded himself with those ads and thus is himself way over his head.

You can read the article and watch the Tory ads here

Conservatives are in way over their heads with attacks on Trudeau 

What do you think of Trudeau's ads? Will they be effective? Is there anything you would have done differently? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Speaker rejects Warawa and 11 Tory MPs call for freedom of speech

Speaker Andrew Scheer ruled on Conservative backbench MP Mark Warawa's complaint finding that his parliamentary privilege had not been violated by Conservative muzzling and effectively left the door open for these 12 MPs to either revolt, leave the party, or vote for a Liberal motion on the topic tomorrow.

Scheer adds the complaint raises a point as statistics show other MPs haven't gotten equivalent speaking opportunities.

Warawa responded via twitter stating, "I'm pleased with Speaker Scheer's ruling that MPs have the right to seek the floor at any time."

I'm pleased with Speaker Scheer's ruling that MPs have the right to seek the floor at any time.
— Mark Warawa (@MPmarkwarawa) April 23, 2013

Warawa took issue to the idea of a party blocking one of its MPs right to speak because it didn't follow the central communications strategy.

Yesterday, the Liberals reached out to Warawa telling him to wait with the ruling until the House had a chance to vote on their motion.

"I would urge you, and I believe it would be prudent for you, to wait a few more days, in the hope that this House is able to pronounce itself through a vote ... which we believe would — in a common sense and very democratic way — resolve this issue," said Liberal House leader Dominic LeBlanc.

The Liberal motion initially supposed to have been presented Monday was postponed to Wednesday make time to debate terrorism laws. 

The bill would modify the order of speakers and how it is determined. Currently, each party's whip determines the order of speakers they've allowed to make a statement and gives their list to the Speaker. Trudeau's modification would enforce the speaker to order MPs by alphabetical order per party. MPs would be allowed to trade speaking spots to give them flexibility in case they cannot be present on the day the speaker finds it is their turn to speak. Independent MPs would be considered a group and placed in alphabetical order.

Warawa told CBC he is leaning towards supporting the motion, we will see if the 11 other backbenchers, who sent the speaker passionate letters supporting his cause, join him.

Backbenchers didn't target their anger at the Prime Minister, but rather the whip, Gordon O'Connor - who takes orders from the Prime Minister. According to O'Connor, the whip's job is to referee and the Speaker's job is to enforce.

"While each party manages the process from a different perspective, the bottom line is that each party makes these decisions," O'Connor said last month.

"The practice for many years in the House is for the Speaker to follow the guidance provided by the parties on which members to call on any given day."

While the NDP claim to support freedom of speech and Warawa's struggle, they say no systematic change is needed and attributes the problem to being inside the Conservative Party itself.

It is also worth noting that when the NDP got wind of Bruce Hyer's intentions to leave their caucus, they stripped his parliamentary privileges.

“We must all recognize that we have developed a problem in Parliament of excessive party control and we must move to fix the problem before it erodes our democracy any further," said Bruce Hyer, an independent MP that had his parliamentary privileges taken from him by the NDP.

While the NDP and Conservatives refuse to address what appears to be a systematic issue, the Liberals will present a motion aimed at diluting much of the partisanship behind messaging that has escalated with the Harper government. We will see how MPs vote on the motion, and if the 12 rogue Conservative backbenchers support the motion that would give them their freedom - regardless what the PMO and whip says.

What do you think of the Speaker's ruling? Do you support Trudeau's motion to reform speaking rights? Is reform necessary? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Trudeau to aid muzzled Conservative backbenchers with new motion

Liberal leader Justin Trudeau is giving Conservative backbench MPs a chance to defy the Harper government's whip powers with a bill that would strip the whip of determining who can speak. The motion will be put to a vote next week and the 9 MPs whom are exposing divisions between the Conservative ranks and their henchmen will be put to the test.

Update: The motion was supposed to have been presented on Monday, Opposition Day, but the government moved opposition day to Wednesday, April 24, the day Trudeau has said he will be in Labrador.

"Members of Parliament from all parties should be community leaders, free to share the priorities and express the views of those they represent," Trudeau said in a statement.

"Canadians must have confidence that the candidates they elect will represent their views in Ottawa, not Ottawa's views to them."

This motion represents the first step of Trudeau's democratic reform platform and will give a hand to muzzled MPs who feel the opposition haven't been sympathetic to their cause.

The bill would modify the order of speakers and how it is determined. Currently, each party's whip determines the order of speakers they've allowed to make a statement and gives their list to the Speaker. Trudeau's modification would enforce the speaker to order MPs by alphabetical order per party. MPs would be allowed to trade speaking spots to give them flexibility in case they cannot be present on the day the speaker finds it is their turn to speak. Independent MPs would be considered a group and placed in alphabetical order.

To change rules in the Commons, a simple majority vote is required. If his motion passes, it would nullify Conservative MP Mark Warawa's plea to the speaker to say his speaking rights have been taken away.

Harper loyalists refuted calls of muzzling stating they are justified due to the promise not to reopen the abortion debate. However, Trudeau promised that in his government, backbench MPs would be allowed to vote however they want unless it was part of the platform and is required to keep the government's confidence in the Commons.

Conservative Whip Gordon O'Connor says only the whip should be allowed to coordinate speakers, just like a coach would coordinate players in a sports team.

Meanwhile, the NDP say they support Conservative backbenchers and NDP House Leader Nathan Cullen said the NDP doesn't take away its members' speakers rights. However, it is worth nothing that two NDP MPs, John Rafferty and Bruce Hyer were stripped of speaking rights earlier this year, along with their rights to making member statements after they voted against the NDP position to support the long gun registry which is now dead in the water. Hyer now sits as an independent MP in the House.

What do you think of Trudeau's first bill regarding democratic reform? Will it offer the 9 revolting Conservative MPs the freedom they've desperately been seeking - if the Conservatives are so restrictive, why not switch party or become independent? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Conservative backbenchers resist muzzling from Harper's office

Conservative MPs are breaking ranks and speaking out against Prime Minister Stephen Harper's quest to muzzle them. As the reasons for breaking ranks vary, one reason has 9 backbench MPs on the same page: freedom of speech, or in laments terms, the lack of it.

It started when Kitchener MP Stephen Woodworth broke ranks and tried to reopen the debate on abortion. He was supposed to speak on March 21 and offer a private members bill on the matter but was taken off the speaker's list. “The reason I was given was that the topic was not approved,” he said.

Shortly after Woodworth made a racket about it, Alberta MP Leon Benoit rose and said his speaking rights were taken too. 

“I want to say that I too feel that my rights have been infringed on by members of the party because I am not allowed to speak on certain topics in S.O. 31s [Standing Order 31],” he said.

“I have had S.O. 31s removed and I have been told that if I have one on a certain topic I simply will not be given S.O. 31s.”

The issue may have gone under the radar over the last few weeks with hype about Liberal leadership and Justin Trudeau but it is returning to the spotlight as BC MP Russ Hiebert joined the 9-MP revolt. On Tuesday he rose in the House of Commons, with Harper's absence, to defend MPs' right to speak without needing the approval of the party whip. 

He read a list of MPs shot down by S.O.31s over things they wanted to say or motions they wanted to bring forward.

"Afterall, these statements are merely words, no matter how contentious some of these subjects raised might be," said Hiebert.

"There is no vote or any other action that can be taken during a one-minute statement that is going to topple a government or cause an election. There is nothing to fear on the part of any party in ensuring a members' rights to speak freely in the House are guaranteed."

Wasana said he will introduce his next steps in a closed-door caucus meeting and said that Harper and his office have enforced iron discipline on what MPs say and do.

Add to the list, MP Brent Rathgeber, who you won't find opposing the Conservatives, but he isn't comfortable with all the stances they've taken.

He said the party discipline is all part of a "marketing strategy" young staffers in the PMO came up with to maintain Conservative votes.

“The kids that work over in Langevin Block [which houses PMO offices], they believe – and they believe rightly – that that type of politicking is ultimately effective,” said Rathgeber.

“You’ve got to really, really, really repeat a simplistic point over and over and over again in order to get it to resonate with somebody who thinks about politics about 14 seconds a day.”

Over lunch, he told Global News that the Conservatives asked him to alter blog posts he wrote that were critical of the government's stances. For instance, in response to the Conservative's response to the "job-killing" carbon tax, he said, “I don’t like them at all.” One of the articles they asked him to change criticized the ministerial use of limousines which has since changed.

“In the early days of my blogging, junior staffers at PMO would phone with all sorts of reasons as to why they should be the editor of my blog,” he said.

On the topic of an outright revolt, Rathgeber said it was a bit far fetched.

“To the extent that is it is a revolt – and I’m not prepared to concede that, although I see how some people see it that way – to the extent that it is a revolt, it’s not a revolt against the leadership, it’s a revolt against the Parliamentary practice.”

“Yes, I do sometimes challenge the government’s legislation or the government’s decisions. But it’s not being disloyal. In fact I would suggest it’s quite the opposite,” he said.

“Some people think that they’re a good backbencher and a loyal and noble foot servant by taking the talking points home on the weekends and telling all their constituents what a great job the government’s doing. I don’t see that as my role. I don’t see that as necessarily the best use of backbenchers’ intelligence or time.”

While it can be agreed that there isn't an outright revolt, the lack of freedom of speech has raised resistance in the back benches. If the awareness and fatigue spreads across other backbench MPs who may be muzzled because their right-wing tendencies get blocked to avoid the opposition war chest, one may see the tension build between the outer span of Conservative MPs and the tightly controlled PMO and cabinet. If one thing is certain, MPs looking to reopen abortion can forget it with the Conservative party. Stephen Harper has been clear that he doesn't want to reopen the debate, and Harper, as well as all political observers in Canada are aware that opening this debate would be a strong nail in the coffin of his career.

We shall see how long back bench MPs stick to their muzzled practices, and if they will continue to resist by coming out to the media. Seeing as how much control there is in MP statements, one can only imagine the stress Conservative MPs actually face as they get pounded by the media who want answers and all they have is a script or disciplinary actions awaiting them. Perhaps MPs who are fed up of their leadership may opt to sit as independents or form a new party that with the right messaging can overrun Conservative support in Alberta. They can start by being the party of the right that strong supports freedom of speech, since the Conservatives don't celebrate or care for it but so many Canadians do.

Nine MPs seem to be resisting their muzzles, do you think it could lead to something bigger? Will they eventually be disciplined back into the fold? Will these MPs resign or cross the floors to independent status or to another political party? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Harper uses Boston terrorist attack as opportunity to attack Trudeau

Two days after Conservative ads were deemed to be failed, Prime Minister Stephen Harper took it upon himself to use the Boston Marathon terrorist attack as an opportunity to attack Liberal leader Justin Trudeau.  The bombing led to 3 deaths, including that of an eight year old boy. Harper made the comments unprompted at Margret Thatcher's ceremonial funeral in England. Trudeau accused Harper of politicizing a tragedy.

Trudeau responded to the Boston attack offering his condolences on Monday.

“I was shocked and saddened to hear of the explosions that occurred today at the Boston Marathon. 

During what was an event worthy of celebration for thousands of people – including many Canadians – this senseless act of violence has left us reeling. 

My thoughts and condolences are with all those in Boston at this time, especially the victims and their families.”

Harper's statement responds to a segment of a CBC interview with Trudeau where Peter Mansbridge asked him how he would deal with a terrorist attack should one happen in Canada.

“We have to look at the root causes,” Trudeau said. “Now, we don’t know now if it was terrorism or a single crazy or a domestic issue or a foreign issue.

“But there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded. Completely at war with innocents. At war with a society. And our approach has to be, where do those tensions come from?”

Harper responded today, to the small segment about 'root causes,' unprompted, “When you see this type of violent act, you do not sit around trying to rationalize it or make excuses for it or figure out its root causes. You condemn it categorically, and to the extent you can deal with the perpetrators, you deal with them as harshly as possible.”

Trudeau has since responded, criticising Harper's attack as politicizing of a disaster.

“I expressed clearly yesterday and today the shock that I can only imagine that father feels whose son was killed for wanting to give him a hug,” Trudeau said.

“I really hope that Mr. Harper rethinks the extent and the lengths he’s willing to go to personally attack people and to politicize tragedies like that.”

The controversy made its way to CBC's Power and Politics where both the NDP and Conservatives decided to attack the Liberals for Trudeau's statement - which is no surprise considering recent polling trends.

The previous attack tried to paint Trudeau as a man without proper judgement and claimed he "was in way over his head." The attack took various clips of Trudeau out of context, including one of a charity event which prompted negative response. As a result, the Liberals released a fundraising email blast where Trudeau said: 

“The Conservatives are already back in the gutter. Now they’re using pictures from a charity fashion show to attack me and undermine what we've built... They've seen what we can do and they’re desperately trying to drown us out with the childish, food-fight politics.”

The response email raised $336,000 in the last 48 hours, which is more than double what it got in previous campaigns. The Liberal email blast also asked its members to donate to the Canadian Liver Foundation which got $10,000 in the last 48 hours as well.

It is unfortunate that the Conservatives have nothing better to do than politicize tragedies and Harper's remarks are crystal clear. Unprompted, Harper chose to take a standard statement about law enforcement and condolences and turned it into a direct political attack. In addition to Harper's judgement on how to deal with terrorists abroad, the NDP joined the Conservative chorus, hoping to regain political points they've lost. It seems that the attack which proved Harper was in over his head earlier this week weren't enough to paint a picture. Instead, now we see that Harper is in way over his head with his hatred toward Trudeau, so much so that an unfortunate tragedy became a personal political attack. 

What do you think of Harper's judgement? Was his unprompted statement justified or just an opportunistic approach to gauge in political warfare? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

Related: Conservatives are in way over their heads with attacks on Trudeau

Conservatives are in way over their heads with attacks on Trudeau

Justin Trudeau started his first day as Liberal leader on Monday and as expected, the Conservatives launched their attack the same day. The attack, like all of their attacks, takes footage out of context in an attempt to smear Trudeau's image. However, not only are the ads backfiring, it appears the Conservatives have gotten themselves way in over their heads with this attack that faces copyright issues with The Huffington Post.

The Conservative attack engine is at it again, but this time their message is weak and the response is overwhelming. While their ads against former Liberal leaders Stephane Dion and Michael Ignatieff may have been effective, their ads against NDP leader Thomas Mulcair, and now Liberal leader Justin Trudeau are a bust.

The ads take footage from Trudeau's striptease for his charity work with the Canadian Liver Foundation and attempt to use it to ridicule Trudeau's judgement. This footage was taken from the Huffington Post who say they have launched a complaint as the Conservatives had no authorization to use the footage. In the English version ads, CTV footage of Pierre Elliot Trudeau's struggle with the separatists was used to try to make Justin look divisive when he was actually describing the mentality of separatists at the time.

"The video clip was taken from The Huffington Post Canada without permission. (HuffPost is making its concerns known to the Conservative Party.)" 

Huffington Post

The ads are no surprise to Trudeau, he in fact announced they would happen in his victory speech Sunday night. If anything, not only do these ads stoop to a new low, they play right into Trudeau's future messaging which will be effective as several factors wane on the Conservative government. These ads don't have a concrete message and they serve as dismiss-able and desperate attempts at a smear.

To those who haven't yet seen them, here they are, along with the raw footage they used.

Raw Footage

CTV Interview
Huffington Post Footage

Conservative Ads (English and French)

Trudeau remained focused on his message in Question Period, one that attacked Harper's hidden tax hikes.

"When middle-class Canadians go into a store to buy a tricycle, to buy school supplies, to buy a little red wagon for their kids, they will pay more because of a tax in this government's budget."

Trudeau also managed to respond to the attack ads promptly.

“Will he [Prime Minister Stephen Harper] show good judgement, admit it is a tax and repeal this tax on middle-class Canadians?” Trudeau asked in Question Period.

“That Mr. Harper and the Conservatives want to change the channel like that, want to talk about anything but their record, is no surprise,” Trudeau told journalists. “But I'm going to keep talking about what matters to Canadians.”

The Conservatives then attacked his striptease for charity, saying in a statement, “We believe Justin Trudeau’s eagerness to perform a strip-tease, regardless of the venue or putative cause, says something about his judgement.”

Trudeau responded saying, “I was glad to offer them my shirt.”

The Canadian Liver Foundation defended Trudeau, releasing a statement that says,

“Mr. Trudeau was willing to not only attend our event but also generously donate a lunch to be auctioned off to raise funds for liver disease research and education.” They go on to say they raised $1,900.

The media also responded with editorials from the National Post, the Toronto Star, and the Huffington Post dismissing the ads as backfired. CTV has acted to point out where the Conservatives used their footage out of context, something that wasn't done when previous Liberal leaders were attacked.

Meanwhile, polls only show an upswing for Trudeau. The recent Nanos poll gives the Liberals a 4 point lead. A forum poll released on Monday put the Liberals at 43% followed by the Conservatives at only 30%. These numbers indicate the Liberals could get a minority or majority government if an election were held today.

With polls supporting Trudeau, a strong negative response towards the Conservatives, it appears they are in way over their heads with this attack.

With a recent International Monetary Fund report ranking Canada as the slowest of 20 countries outside Europe in economic growth, after their ad stating that they have the "Strongest Job Creation Record in the G7", it is safe to say that a Conservative government eager to use an economic track record as "experience" shows Prime Minister Stephen Harper's judgement and how he and his Finance Minister Jim Flaherty are in way over their heads.

What do you think of the Conservative ads? Do you think they are effective? Will they backfire? Have they already backfired? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+.

IMF: Canada has weakest economy of 20 countries outside Europe

The International Monetary Fund warns Canada's economy is not the superstar economy the Harper government praises it to be. The IMF goes further to say that of 20 countries outside Europe, Canada will have the slowest rate of growth in 2013 and will cease to be the engine of growth among the G7. They link the slow down to Conservative economic policies. Forget the hype, Canada's Economic Action Plan was nothing but an ad campaign.

The IMF's World Economic Outlook report, released Tuesday, pit Canada's growth forecast for 2013 at 1.5%, down from its October estimate of 2%. Meanwhile, Japan and the United States are moving along, with growth rates of 1.6% and 1.9% respectively, despite a sluggish rate of 0.3% for Europe.

The IMF said Canada’s economy is expanding at the slowest pace since 2009, one year after the start of the 2008 economic downturn. The housing boom at the time helped keep Canada's economy from venturing deeper into the recession but high levels of household-debt constrained demand. The IMF advises the Harper government to prepare growth-supporting measures to counter a continued weakening trend since they've chosen to cut spending and stem increases in household borrowing. They suggested maintaining steady deficits and freezing the Bank of Canada's interest rate at 1%.

“The main challenge for Canada’s policy-makers is to support growth in the short term while reducing the vulnerabilities that may arise from external shocks and domestic imbalances,” the body advises.

“Although fiscal consolidation is needed to rebuild fiscal space against future shocks, there is room to allow automatic stabilizers to operate fully if growth were to weaken further.”

In addition to this bleak outlook, the IMF predicts the trend will continue for the next two years, with stagnant unemployment rates at 7.2% and a significant deficit. To make matters worse, several countries will outperform Canada, contrary to Conservative economic messaging.

Canada is expected to under-perform the United States for the next 2 years and countries outside the G7 like the Scandinavian nations, Australia and New Zealand. 

While the IMF says a stronger US will help Canada, getting Canadians to overcome household-debt must be a priority. While the Harper Government has addressed that, reforming mortgage rules and giving Canadian jobs to temporary foreign workers will counter-act any stability they hope to find. Rather than focus on debt repayment, cash-strapped Canadians will continue to dig themselves deeper into debt to make ends meet, thus shifting the burden of debt elsewhere and creating future economic troubles. By forcefully lowering the standard of living of Canadians to adhere to market pressures, other parts of the market will be negatively impacted leading to further economic slowdown.

What do you think of the IMF report and how the Harper government has dealt with the economy? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+. 

Justin Trudeau takes Liberal Helm

The Liberal Leadership race came to a close today. After a week-long voting period, 104,552 ballots were cast, representing 82% of eligible voters for the leadership race. Trudeau has taken 80.1% of those votes and his chief opponent Joyce Murray received 10.2%.

In his victory speech, Trudeau thanked his supporters for their confidence. “My fellow Liberals, it is with great respect for those who have stood in this place before me and great resolve to do the hard work that is required in front of us that I accept with great humility the confidence you have placed in me,” he said.

Trudeau attacked divisive politics, stating Canadians are open to change and they are fed up with negative politics.

"We are fed up with leaders who pit Canadians against Canadians. West against East, rich against poor, Quebec against the rest of the country, urban against rural," Trudeau said.

"Canadians are looking to us, my friends. They are giving us a chance, hopeful that the party of Wilfrid Laurier can rediscover its sunny ways."

Trudeau also called for unity within the Liberal Party, calling for the end of hyphenated Liberals.

"It doesn’t matter to me if you were a Chretien-Liberal, a Turner-Liberal, a Martin-Liberal or any other kind of Liberal. The era of hyphenated Liberals ends right here, tonight."

Trudeau told fellow Liberals to expect Conservative attacks to begin soon. He fired back stating the Conservatives will attack because they are afraid of an engaged and informed Canadian populace.

The Conservatives started their attack with a statement from spokesman Fred DeLorey. "Justin Trudeau may have a famous last name, but in a time of global economic uncertainty, he doesn't have the judgement or experience to be prime minister." Arguably, Trudeau has more experience today upon taking the helm than Stephen Harper did when he won his leadership race for the Conservative Party in 2004.

While Trudeau may have won in a landslide, here is how the rest of the results carried through. The leadership race saw record voting turnout with 82% of 127,264 eligible voters taking the time to cast a ballot. The Liberals' 104,552 votes cast easily beats Conservative and NDP numbers in their past races. The voting procedure featured a preferential ballot that let voters rank their choices. Each riding was given 100 points which correlated to the percentage of votes each candidate got. These points were then tallied up to reach a total out of 30,800 points. This counting process would have continued until a candidate won 50%+1 of the votes or 15,401 points, redistributing the votes of the last-place candidate to their second choice decisions each time.

Results

Candidate	Points	Percentage
Justin Trudeau	24,668	80.1%
Joyce Murray	3,130	10.2%
Martha Hall Findlay	1,760	5.7%
Martin Cauchon	815	2.6%
Deborah Coyne	214	0.7%
Karen McCrimmon	210	0.7%

Points needed to win first tally: 15,401
Total Points: 30,800, 100 Per Riding based on percentage of vote.
Votes Cast: 104,552
Eligible Voters: 127,264
Turnout: 82%

The evening also featured speeches from former Prime Minister Jean Chretien and former Interim leader Bob Rae.

Jean Chretien's speech actively mocked the Conservatives and NDP while promoting the idea of a future Liberal government. He mocked the NDP's decision to remove the word 'socialist' from their constitution, mocked Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty for taking credit to an inherited banking system that his leader once opposed and mocked the Quebec separatist parties for trying to hide behind who they are.

“Under a new Liberal leader, the best is yet to come,” Chretien said. He later declared: “Today marks the beginning of the end of this Conservative government.”

Bob Rae's speech mocked Harper's office as having nothing more than a mirror and a thrown. To an eager crowd, Rae called Harper Canada's "Interim Prime Minister."

Recent polls give the Liberals a 4 point lead over the Conservatives while speculative polls claimed a Trudeau victory could expand that lead by about 10 points. Most of the changes come at the expense to the NDP, who used this weekend to try to move to the center amidst reluctance and resistance from the party's left-wing base.

Justin Trudeau is now the leader of the Liberal Party, what do you think of this result? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+. 

Liberals and NDP use weekend for housekeeping

This weekend the Liberals and NDP are doing housekeeping in preparation for a showdown in the polls. With recent polls showing Liberal momentum and a strong possibility that Justin Trudeau will win the leadership, the NDP prepares to take a massive hit. The NDP are meeting to discuss policy and give their leader Thomas Mulcair a new image.

As Liberal members and supporters vote for their new leader, a new Nanos poll released yesterday gives the Liberals the lead for the first time since 2009. The poll gives them 35.4% support followed by the Conservatives in steady decline with 31.3% and the NDP who dropped to 23.6%. One can expect that if the trend continues, the NDP will be in major trouble. The results of the vote will be announced tomorrow evening. So far, the Liberals have received 91,894 of the eligible 127,259 votes, surpassing the number of votes cast at the NDP leadership convention, 65,108, in 2012 and creeping towards the Conservative leadership convention, 97,397, in 2004.

This weekend, the NDP are working on policy and image. While Mulcair hopes to take his socialist-leaning party to the center, some of the proposals tend to carry his party even further to the left. These proposals haven't yet been passed and may not even make it to the floor, but given these ideas still float around, one can imagine how difficult it will be for Mulcair to convert this historically left-wing party into a centrist one to try to mirror the Liberals who are already centrist.

Take the proposal to centralize the Canadian banking system. Canada's banking system is one of the few that survived the recession thanks to two factors: proper regulation, and the fact they were private.

#86 - Role of the Bank of Canada
Submitted by Saanich-Gulf Islands

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the New Democratic Party as government take steps as quickly as possible to revive the role of the Bank of Canada for the purpose intended, in the spirit of the 1935 terms, to enable all levels of government to borrow money, essentially interest free, for the benefit of Canada and Canadians; 

and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Canadian governments cease to borrow from private banks or other private lending agencies as soon as this Bank of Canada legislation is in place.

Take this other proposal to force Canadians to vote - so much for rights and freedoms. Forcing Canadians to vote won't improve matters, they just bring in this "big government knows all" mentality and infrastructure which infringes on people's right not to vote, especially in a time when most political parties only care about power and Canadians would prefer nothing over their options.

#43 Compulsory Voting in Canada
Submitted by Elmwood-Transcona

WHEREAS the duty to vote is required to maintain our democratic system and the benefits that go with it, and 

WHEREAS countries like Australia, and 29 other countries, including Belgium and Austria, successfully employ Compulsory Voting in a congenial system that employs weekend voting, simple registration procedures, and the creation of a centralized, professional bureaucracy concerned with all aspects of election administration, 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the New Democratic Party endorse Compulsory Voting as a democratic 'Best Practice' with view to having an NDP Government passing national legislation making it law.

Another happens to go after our government system. The Queen hasn't imposed on Canada, and her representative has offered neutral oversight over our electoral system. Change for the sake of changing has been the mantra of the left for a while and the NDP appear to have the same view here.

#55 Resolution on a Parliamentary Republic of Canada
Submitted by Chicoutimi-Le Fjord

WHEREAS the NDP aims to create a more equitable and democratic society, with equal rights for all Canadians and a government held accountable to the democratic process; 

WHEREAS Canada's current head of state can only be a protestant descended from Sophia of Hanover, and a member of the Church of England;
We hereby move:
That an NDP government would pursue the objective of establishing a parliamentary republic upon the death of the current sovereign.
That an NDP government would form a Commission to recommend a method for choosing a head of state for Canada based on consultation with Canadian experts and citizens.

Senior NDP Officials want to rebrand the NDP and gut the term "socialist" which is active in their constitution and mentality. In the place of a statement which acted to be anti-business and prop up big government, the NDP are proposing the following as a guiding statement for their party.

"New Democrats affirm a role for government in helping to create the conditions for sustainable prosperity."

"We believe in a rules-based economy, nationally and globally, in which governments have the power to address the limitations of the market in addressing the common good, by having the power to act in the public interest, for social and economic justice, and for the integrity of the environment."

It will be interesting to watch Canada's opposition parties restructure in preparation for an inevitable showdown against each other and against Stephen Harper's Conservatives. As Mulcair tries to give himself a friendlier image and move his party to the center to appeal to more voters, the Liberals appear to be shifting back to their traditional center with Trudeau. While the NDP try to ditch the anti-business stance they've had for years, the business community is suggesting Trudeau to be better for business than Harper.

It is one thing for the opposition parties to speak and organize themselves, it's another for them to be prepared to form a government one day. While many grow tired of the Conservative government, it should be the primary focus of both opposition parties to prove not only that they are ready to form a realistic government, but that they stand for principle and not for a power grab. What do you think of their housekeeping? Will the changes coming this weekend have a strong impact on the Canadian political scene? Will the NDP or Liberals emerge as a government in waiting? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+. 

Former Tory PM, endorses Trudeau, infuriates Conservatives

Voting for the next Liberal leader may only end on Sunday but for former Progressive Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, Justin Trudeau is the clear choice. Mulroney infuriated the Conservative party Monday as he endorsed their toughest adversary in an interview with CTV's Power Play. Ever since Trudeau entered the race, polls have shown a sharp incline for the party which would give them a majority government.


Mulroney, without any hesitation, has endorsed Trudeau stating there's nothing to hate about him and that he shouldn't be underestimated.

"I've known Justin since he was a child. He is young, articulate, attractive - a flawlessly bilingual young man. What's not to like with this picture? 

Anybody who treats Justin Trudeau with scorn or derision or underestimates him does so at his own peril. 

We'll see what happens in the future; it's a long way from here to there. But no one should underestimate Justin. He is a man of some consequence." 

Brian Mulroney, Progressive Conservative, Prime Minister: 1984 to 1993

Conservative bloggers have lashed out at Mulroney, one stated that he was the worst PM after Pierre Elliot Trudeau, another wrote, "It's amazing what old age can do to a person."

The endorsement came as a surprise considering Mulroney's opposition to his father, former Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. In an interview in 2007, Mulroney said Pierre was "far from a perfect man."

"This is a man who questioned the Allies when the Jews were being sacrificed and, when the great extermination program was on, he was marching around Outremont [Montreal] on the other side of the issue," Mulroney said in 2007.

Mulroney isn't the only high profile person from outside Liberal circles to endorse Justin. Last month, former Canadian Alliance - Reform - Party leader and cabinet Minister in the Harper government, Stockwell Day said Trudeau shouldn't be underestimated.

"I got to know him — obviously we were fellow MPs. I have a lot of respect for him. He is genuinely a nice guy. 

When people used to laugh and say ‘he doesn't have his father’s brain, there’s no way he could do this’ I constantly — for the last two or three years — have been telling my colleagues 'do not laugh at this guy, do not dismiss him, he may not have his father’s brain but he’s got a big heart and he has the ability to win people over. 

Many people, including some in the media that are dismissive of him, do not understate this guy and he will be a force to be dealt with." 

Stockwell Day, Canadian Alliance, Conservative, 2000-2011

Former Conservative and Reformers aren't the only ones jumping on the Trudeau bandwagon, the Canadian Business Magazine has also thrown their interest behind Trudeau in an article headlined "Justin Trudeau might be better for business than Stephen Harper."

"For those inclined to simply dismiss Justin Trudeau: don’t. Even in the unlikely event he’s not elected leader of the Liberal party, his recruitment of 150,000 new party supporters and collection of $1.3 million in donations unmistakably confirm him as an influential force in Canadian politics. 

Adore or despise him, it is time to take Justin Trudeau seriously. He supports free trade, foreign direct investment and carbon pricing, all pointing to a curious conclusion: the shaggy-haired, former whitewater guide has an agenda just as capitalist-friendly as the Conservatives. If that notion is odd, this one is heretical: Justin Trudeau might be better for business than Stephen Harper." 

James Cowan, Canadian Business, Justin Trudeau might be better for business than Stephen Harper

The momentum spreads past the business world and directly to the Canadian people where polls consistently  show some sort of Trudeau-mania. Polls which feature Justin find that the Liberal party gains 10% in popular opinion with him at its helm. These same polls place Trudeau on top with a range of 38% and 41%, giving Trudeau a strong minority government, or a majority about the same size as Harper's right now. The polls pit the Conservatives in second and the NDP in a varying distant third.

The Liberal membership and supporters haven't finished voting but it's safe to say the buzz is around Trudeau and he will be one to watch. With polls showing he surpasses his opponents in support, with analytics showing he triumphs in endorsements and reigns in the most money, it is almost guaranteed that he will win the leadership - unless Liberal members and supporters give into Joyce Murray, Trudeau's perceived competitor, and give Thomas Mulcair's NDP their first ever mandate.

What do you think of Trudeau's endorsements from traditional Conservative safe havens? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+. 

Canada's Economic Action Plan: Replacing Canadians with temporary foreign workers

You may have seen the ads, they air everyday. They tout the government's steady hand on the economy and the creation of new jobs. However, putting successful PR aside, recent job numbers state a dip of 50K jobs and an explosive report finds that common Canadian jobs are being given to temporary foreign workers for lower wages.


The explosive headlines started when a recent CBC investigation found that 45 Canadian employees at RBC will be replaced with temporary foreign workers from India hired by Indian multinational outsourcing firm iGATE. It turns out, RBC was just a drop in the bucket as other companies like Subway, Tim Hortons, Dairy Queen, McDonalds, A&W, and thousands of others, got government approval to use the Temporary Foreign Workers Program to hire employees at lower wages. The full list can be seen in the document released to the Alberta Federation of Labour and CBC through an Access to Information request.

The Temporary Foreign Workers Program was designed to deal with labour shortages and match unfilled jobs which are seasonal, regional or meant for high-skilled workers, with foreigners with the specifications to take these jobs. However, this list includes many jobs in the service sector, jobs which don't fit with the purpose of the Temporary Foreign Workers Program as no special skills from outside Canada are required.

In 2012, 338,000 foreign workers took jobs as per the Accelerated Labour Market Opinion Process, up from 240,000 in 2008, which accelerates the approval of outsourcing jobs to foreign workers. The question now lies on whether these rules should be tighter and whether companies have been abusing the program to hire workers at cheaper wages. Add recent EI changes which bring punishing changes to Canadians who are out of work and we have an issue. Over 1.4 million Canadians are currently unemployed, the job market is stagnate and companies that are hiring, are using the Temporary Foreign Workers Program to dodge Canadian-standard salaries. At the same time, salaries are stagnating as the cost of living continues to incline.

On CBC's Power and Politics, Parliamentary Secretary to the Human Resources Minister, Kellie Leitch, said the program could be used to hire managers. She also said that it was important that companies follow the rules and that Canadians get a first cut at available jobs. She went on to note a "huge" labour shortage in Alberta. Look at Tim Hortons, look at McDonalds, and the many pizza joints and service-sector jobs that appear in this list and one must wonder what kind of jobs could be so advanced in these restaurants that no Canadian can possibly take them. What Canadian can't be a manager of any of these restaurants?

Further into the program, a defensive Leitch admitted that RBC was an example of how the program wasn't working, responding to host Evan Soloman's question with "Thats absolutely correct."

Meanwhile, University of Toronto Professor Audrey Macklin, who specializes in immigration law, contradicts what Leitch has said, claiming the Harper government has pro-actively encouraged the use of the Temporary Foreign Workers Program. 

"The Canadian government has been aggressively encouraging employers to use temporary foreign workers," said Macklin. "In effect, the government of Canada subsidizes employers to the tune of five to 15 per cent of labour costs on the backs of temporary foreign workers and at the expense of Canadians." 

She added that companies will turn to external suppliers, like iGATE in RBC's case, to find and hire these temporary foreign workers.

Spokeswoman for Human Resources Minister, Alyson Queen, said the government will look into the way the program has been used.

"An investigation is under way and HRSDC officials are currently reviewing the labour market opinions submitted by iGate in great detail, based on apparent discrepancies between RBC’s public statement and information which has previously been provided to the government."

These issues are clearly not new, seeing as how these hirings have been taking place over the past years, along with PR for "Canada's Economic Action Plan". The Harper government reformed EI to try to force unemployed Canadians to move out west, these changes feature restrictions on eligibility and force Canadians to accept jobs with lower pay if they are laid off. On top of this, some mothers who have left for maternity leave will soon find that if they were laid off, they won't be eligible to EI benefits. 

So what do you think of the list of thousands of companies who claimed they couldn't find Canadian workers to fill their jobs? Did they abuse the system? Is the Harper government responsible for this controversy and can we trust that they will put Canadian workers first? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+. 

Elections Canada charges former Tory staffer in Robocall probe

It has been nearly 2 years since the election that gave the Conservative Party a majority mandate and since alleged robocalls took the political scene by storm with the sole intention of misleading voters. The Conservatives may have tried to deny it and derail any investigations, but Elections Canada has moved forward with its investigation placing charges in the riding where it all started.

Yesterday, former Conservative junior staffer in Guelph, Michael Sona was charged under the Elections Canada Act for violating section 491(3)d which prohibits preventing or trying to prevent voters from casting their vote.

Sona's first court appearance is set for May 3 and if the case finds him guilty, he can face a maximum penalty of 5 years in prison and $5,000 in fines.

Sona's lawyer Norm Boxall has released a statement that joins the chorus asking for a public inquiry.

"I cannot help but comment that if the government was interested in the public being fully informed and the issue of robocalls being properly addressed, a full public inquiry would be called, rather than a charge laid against a single individual who held a junior position on a single campaign and who clearly lacked the resources and access to the data required to make the robocalls. I am confident the public agrees."

Sona has spoke publicly last fall stating that he has no interest in taking the fall for actions that he is not responsible for.

"All the anonymous sources in the world can point the finger at me, but I'm not going to take responsibility for something that I'm not responsible for," Sona said.

"I think that there's some people that maybe had an interest in seeing me take the fall for it."

His argument went on to state that it is impossible for someone with no access to the calling list that was used in the scandal to be able to pull it off and that he felt the party was using him as a scape goat.

"You've got to take a look at the options and just say, 'You know what, what is the more realistic option here? That some then-22-year-old guy managed to co-ordinate this entire massive scheme when he didn't even have access to the data to be able to do this, or the alternative — that this was much more coordinated or possibly that there were people that knew how to do this, that it was being done?'"

Documents filed in court state that Conservative Party lawyer Arthur Hamilton said the list of people who got misleading phone calls in Guelph was the same as the party's list of non-supporters on April 27, 2011. 

Meanwhile, Elections Canada hopes the charges send a strong message to those who were involved in the distributions of misleading robocalls that has lead to complaints in 247 ridings. 

"The strong public reaction to the fraudulent telephone calls made to electors in Guelph during the May 2011 general election shows how deeply disturbed Canadians were by what happened," said Yves Côté, the commissioner of Canada Elections.

"I hope that the charge we filed today will send a strong message that such abuses under the Canada Elections Act will not be tolerated."

However, Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand paints a bleak picture stating in his report that unless election laws are changed, another robocall scandal can happen in the next election.

The Conservative Party, which has faced a lot of heat throughout the ordeal has released a statement professing its innocence.

"In 2011 we reached out to Elections Canada when we heard of wrongdoing in Guelph and did all we could to assist them. We are pleased that Elections Canada's work has progressed to this point. The Conservative Party of Canada ran a clean and ethical campaign and does not tolerate such activity. The Party was not involved with these calls and those that were will not play a role in any future campaign. Voter suppression is extremely serious and those responsible should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. We spent the entire campaign identifying supporters and we worked hard to get them out to vote. Our job is to get votes out, we do not engage in voter suppression."

However, their past actions say otherwise:

1. Tories blame Elections Canada, Liberal Party and Michael Sona
2. MP Dean Del Mastro speaks for Conservatives and says there might have been "mistakes" after claiming the scandal was an ‘unsubstantiated smear campaign’
3. Former Conservative MPs raise red flags on Conservative data system
4. Conservatives reluctantly decide to cooperate with the Elections Canada investigation
5. Liberals and Canadian public demand Public Inquiry, Conservatives reject.
6. Dean Del Mastro is under investigation for alleged abnormalities in his campaign, the NDP let him off the hook and he is nowhere to be seen.

For a party that has rosy words professing their innocence and a "tough on crime" mantra, their actions have cast doubt on their integrity. A public inquiry should have cleared the Conservatives of wrong doing. Taking robocall seriously, rather than dismissing it as an "unsubstantiated smear campaign" would have shown the Conservatives are tough on crime: election fraud is a crime.

Recently, Elections Canada found that Labrador MP Peter Penashue accepted 28 illegal donations in the last election. Penashue has resigned, only to state that he would run again and to start his new campaign several days before his resignation even came to light.

Sona said he wasn't going to be the scapegoat for the Conservative Party. We shall now see what he has to say and who he will implicate as Canadians await answers. It is clear that there is sufficient evidence that illegal activities took place in the last election, and the fact that a charge was laid on a Conservative staffer only begins to indicate what we can and should expect over the next few months.

Again, on grounds of principle and even political strategy, what are the Conservatives thinking? Innocent people don't hide, don't blame, don't dismiss wrong doing, especially not those who promise to clean up crime. For an innocent Conservative party, a public inquiry would have done two things: clear their names if they are innocent and make them appear tough on crime. However, it isn't too late to call a public inquiry. Arguably, if the Conservatives have any left over integrity (they shot themselves in the foot with their initial reactions and reluctance), and are reading this, they should push for an inquiry to get to the bottom of this - unless of course, they have something to hide.

On a side note, if the Conservatives are really keen on representing Canadian people and Canadian values they should be calling byelections in the close ridings which were allegedly targeted by robocalls. The last court case, which appealed the lower court's decision to call a byelection, saw a Conservative victory in the Supreme Court against former Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj who argued that the difference between him and current MP Ted Opitz was less than the number of people who received suspicious calls in Etobicoke Centre.

So what do you think? Will charging Michael Sona end the probe? Will he release details that are necessary to solving the case? Will the Conservatives finally call a public inquiry? Join the discussion and let us know what you think: Facebook, Twitter, Google+. 

For more coverage on the Ongoing Robocall Scandal, you can follow this feed.

Robocall Scandal – To date