Former Quebec ad executive pleads guilty to 28 fraud charges


CBC News
#1
Former ad executive Jean Lafleur pleaded guilty on Friday to 28 fraud charges related to the federal sponsorship scandal.

More...
 
tamarin
#2
So, do we get our money back? There's little sense in these trials if the lucre isn't recovered.
 
Toro
#3
Ah, a member of the Liberal Crime Syndicate pays the price.

So many more to go.
 
WilliamAshley
#4
With my general skeptisism of court process after being framed in the past.. and the concerns over national policy level projects (including potential for misrepresentation due to national security and it being a wartime, I really can't take any of the sponsership Canada Unity project at face value.

Personally the Canada Unity project at face value didn't seem 'scandalous' although propaganda how is national sponsership any different than corporate sponsership?

But as far as rerouting government funds to your political supporters.. why does the government even handle those funds? Why doesn't a third non political non votable body (laughingly, like the queen) admister those funds through a public servant rolls, for which the queen of canada administers rather than political forces such as the prime minister. why should we have political forces above the civil service in administration of funds. Let them set and oversee and report projects in scope of 'legeistlation' occur in parliament, but leave the actual management of government to devoted lifelong public servants rather than temprorary popular representatives.

Perhaps I see it at a different level, but I Think that is where political scandal and mismanagement occurs. Although some parliamentarians are very much life long devotees with many years in office, I firmly beleive that parliamentarians should not manage or contract services or even have operational contact with the ministeries. I think that secretaries of state, and ministers of legislation should very much be the merit of the offices and cabinet, but implementation should firmly be left in the hands of the monarchs devoted public service, that service the publics will. On those same grounds the public service should not exercise vote, much like the military should not exercise vote or any other direct offier of the monarch.

The issue is clear, we should not allow politicians to manage the public, they should be voicing their opinions and leave assent and exectutive direction as originally intended to the queens executive officers whether governor general or otherwise. The reason for potential of scandal and legal potential for problems is due to the disproportionate common republican sentiment that grants more power to offices that were never designed as such. It is understandable to create new offices, but allowing a swelling of power in the PM or even parliament alone itself is not truely representative nor is it wise, imo.
 

Similar Threads

no new posts