"guite guilte" - Chuck Guite found guilty - June 6

Chuck Guité found guilty of fraud
Tue, 06 Jun 2006 12:25:10 EDT
http://tinyurl.com/jherh

So, Guite "defrauded the federal government", as the official line reads. We might ask bigger questions, like "Was it part of a larger plan where people higher up would have been the ones to initiate it because these guys like Guite would not have had the job of holding the nation together during a refernadum on Quebec separation".

Thats a mouthfull, but it means that PM Chretian would have been the only one to ask for that kind of "sponsorship" fraud, were cash was given for loyalty and for propaganadist TV messages encouraging the NO vote to separation. No civil servant would take it upon himself to arrange to do this, there is no doubt that he would have needed higher up help and inspiration.

So, now that the courts have let us down, and after the Liberal Party failed to finger the higher ups, we can only look back and see that the VOTERS did the only thing left, the last resort for justice, and refused to vote for the liberals in the last election.

We could say "good enough" and forgive Liberals now that they have a new leadership, but its not good enough, the prime players didn't get charged.

But, the present Liberal party leadership didn't "out the worst offenders" either, and some of the new crop is the same as the old crop, so hopefully this lack of support for the Liberals continues in the Canadian public, in lock step with the Liberals failure to comunicate to us who the truly guilty are.

With the Conservatives heading for the cliff of Afghanistan, perhaps there will be TWO poitical parties in Canada without supporters.

I am happy to see that Charles Guité¹ has been found found guilty for his part in this issue. However, as opposed to some other members here (in my experience, anyway), I think that it is ludicrous to suggest that civil servants could never commit unlawful acts without the "instigation" of their respective minister — there are thousands of persons working beneath each minister.

Revision : (1) Corrected a formatting error.

Maybe that should read: "Quiet Guite found Quite Guilty" :P

It is Gomery who maintains they should be held responsible. Obviously a minister would only be held responsible if he/she was aware, or should have been aware of, what is going on. If the indifference or ignorance was deliberate than the penalty for the ministers should be especially harsh. If they can prove they did not know, or were misled, then they should not be held accountable. It is fairly simple to impose standards of accountability. I fail to see what is ludicrous about democracy and accountability and transparency are the linchpins of democracy.

With respect, sanch, perhaps you misunderstood my sentiments.

I would of course recognize that any Government of Canada should be transparent, and should be held to account; however, some members have suggested elsewhere that any unlawful activity in a department or ministry must have been the doing of the appropriate Minister of the Crown, and it is this "perception" that I addressed in my post. I think it is quite possible for a minister to be quite "innocent", whether or not unlawful activities took place beneath her or him.

Hi ho, Hi ho,
Its off to jail they go........

Hopefully the first of many. Maybe a cell with Bubba will convince Chucky to spill the beans. Naw, probably not. He just ain't that bright.

You are right Five that it is quite possible a minister might not be aware of crimes or wrong doing in his/her department. But they should ensure that there are mechanisms available so that they might be informed of this wrong doing should it occur. Right now the ministers are very well insulated by design.

It is the job of the attorney general to monitor the civil service. Ideally one should be able to report any wrong doing to his/her office. All correspondence though goes through one centralized mail room at Justice and the protocol is to send any complaints to the office—and sometimes even the individuals--mentioned in the complaint. Any inquiry then is conducted at this level without any involvement or oversight from any objective body. Of course no wrong doing is ever uncovered. Now the AG is unaware of any of these complaints or their substance and so is innocent. The AG is aware though that there is no accountability or transparency in the review of complaints and so is aware of the process whereby justice is circumvented.

In the trials of corporate executives and politicians in the US judges are instructing juries that where a head in the sand defense is used they can return with a verdict of deliberate ignorance. This occurred with Ken Lay who really had no first hand knowledge of any crimes. He should have known though. He was in charge.

Ministers in Canada should as well be aware of what is going on in their respective departments and should make every attempt to uncover wrong doing. That is their job.

I think we should arrest Chretian and his Finance Minister at the time and like the theme is to not even consider them innocent, throw them in jail and then after a mock trial shoot them for their fraud.

"If they can prove they did not know"

excuse me?

It's just nice to see people in a position of power over the public purse put on notice. As in the US where people with the responsibility of managing the corporate purse have finally been shown the wall. Bernard Ebbers, Ken Lay just two of the latest convicted. And here in Canada in our own little bout of malfeasance Brault and now Guite. Most of us have said for years the big guys get away with it. Now we can't be so cavalier in our assessments. That has to be a good thing.