Justin True Dough: Greediest Grifter in Parliament

[TeddyBallgame]

- Everybody who knows anything about Pierre Trudeau knows that he was notoriously tight with his own money, chronically undertipping in restaurants and once suing the town council for allegedly overbilling him by $8 on the property tax for his summer place.

- It was only with ordinary Canadians hard earned tax money that Peter Waterhole spend like a drunken sailor on shore leave.

- Now we learn that the apple didn't grow far from the tree (and the sap) insofar as being a greedy, grasping, money conscious weasel is concerned.

- I for one do not begrudge Justin Trudeau the trust fund now worth $1,242,000 that his old man provided for him so that he was taken care of and could bum around and dabble in various things in his 20s and 30s.

- Nor do I begrudge young Justin the $10,000 a year in royalties he receives from PET's books or the vintage mercedes-benz convertible bequeathed to him by Pierre or the luxury summer chalet and the lavish Montreal mansion high atop Mount Royal that he shares with his other two siblings.

- But I do begrudge him the leadership of a major political party and possibly the entire country based on absolutely no qualifications, experience or accomplishments other than being the son of the former prime minister. Canadians certainly deserve better than this lightweight space cadet at the helm of our ship of state.

- And I also begrudge him the $277,000 he has made as a public speaker SINCE he was elected as an MP in 2008.

- You see, folks, Justin the drama and english teacher has been making big money since 2006 through a speakers bureau, trading on his famous name as he has traded on it for everything else he has received thusfar in life.

- Justin pulled down $290,000 in speakers fees in his first year in the business, 2006, and he scored $462,000 in his best year, 2007.

- In 2008, Trudeau was elected as a Liberal MP and as such was expected to somehow get by on a paltry $170,000 a year plus several other allowances and perks bringing the equivalent total compensation up to roughly $235,000 a year.

- But no, this was not enough for our greedy, grasping, tight fisted weasel always in search of True Dough!

- Because it is legal, Justin Trudeau has actaully continued to charge for many of his public speeches and has made over $277,000 in speakers fees since he was elected as a member of parliament.

- There is not a single leading member of parliament nor, as far as I can determine, any member of parliament in the House of Commons who charges Canadians for his public speeches other than, of course, the charges inherent in the rather sizable pay, perks and pensions proferred in the position.

- Every MP who has been interviewed about this issue has opined correctly that an important part of an MP`s job is to frequently meet and communicate with the public, without charge, on the issues and challenges and opportunities and policy choices of the day.

- But then few if any MPs are as greedy bastards as PET was and Justin so obviously is.

- Is anybody here prepared to argue that Justin Trudeau is right to charge thousands of extra dollars or even a single penny (make that nickel now) over and above his MP`s compensation as recompense for speaking to the public.

 

[gerryh]

Trudeau is not the only one that does this. As a matter of fact there are Conservative Parliamentarians that do the exact same thing.

 

[TeddyBallgame]

Trudeau is not the only one that does this. As a matter of fact there are Conservative Parliamentarians that do the exact same thing.

- Do you really think this is an appropriate thing for an MP to do?

- Please name these Conservative MPs (not senators, MPs) who do this and provide us with the amounts of money they have made since 2008 for doing this and the source of your information.

- If any LEADING (cabinet members, parliamentary secretaries, front benchers, etc.) MPs of any party other than True Dough do this, I shall be very much surprised.

 

[gerryh]

Conservative Senators, they are still Parliamentarians.

There is nothing in the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons to prevent MPs who are not cabinet ministers or parliamentary secretaries from moonlighting in another job or running a business as long as the work doesn’t create conflicts of interest. And there is no need for MPs to declare who hires them to speak.“The Code does not require the Office to maintain a list of businesses who hire Members of the House of Commons for speaking engagements,” said Jocelyne Brisebois, a spokeswoman for the ethics commissioner.

Trudeau also stopped the speaking engagements when he decided to run for the Leadership in the spring of 2012.

His income from speaking was significantly more than his trust and he cut down considerably when he was elected as an MP.

It looks to me like you have a problem with free enterprise when it doesn't apply to a Conservative.

Here's a good article concerning the speaking engagements.

Yahoo! News Canada - Latest News & Headlines

and as an aside, here we have Justin Trudeau doing everything to make sure that he doesn't have any conflict of interest charges and then we have a Conservative Cabinet Minister having to resign because of a conflict.

Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan resigns after writing letter to tax court | APTN National News

 

[CDNBear]

It looks to me like you have a problem with free enterprise when it doesn't apply to a Conservative.

I bet Justin has a problem with free enterprise when it doesn't apply to himself.

 

[Tonington]

- There is not a single leading member of parliament nor, as far as I can determine, any member of parliament in the House of Commons who charges Canadians for his public speeches other than, of course, the charges inherent in the rather sizable pay, perks and pensions proferred in the position.

Senators Pamela Wallin, Mike Duffy, Jacques Demers, and Larry Smith- all have been accepting speaking fees while employed in Parliament. For starters.
Mistaken in first remarks, Wallin now says she accepted speaker

 

[DaSleeper]

Didn't he specify "Not Senators" in the next post?
Edit: I see that second generation Trudeau mania is alive and well;-):canada:

 

[Cliffy]

Ah, if Justin causes Teddy to get his panties in a twist, he must be a good man. Personally, I don't see any difference between the Libs and the Cons. They are both in the corporate pocket and on the take. Teddy, on the other hand, is a master of sour grapes.

 

[Tonington]

Didn't he specify "Not Senators" in the next post?
Edit: I see that second generation Trudeau mania is alive and well;-):canada:

Yes, after his original post clearly stated, well I quoted it. Maybe the original goal posts didn't fit the narrative Teddy was weaving? Who knows. Why would it matter anyways if it's an MP or a Senator Das? If it's unethical? At the very least, constituents don't have to send the MP back to Ottawa if they do not feel they are being represented adequately. Senators...not so much. And some of these Senators are those Harper has appointed to help him reform the Upper Chamber.

 

[DaSleeper]

To the shiny phony's credit, he has dutifully declared all that income.........





But I still think he's a phony:lol:

 

[Colpy]

I think Pierre Trudeau was the worst PM we ever had, and I am not sure Canada will ever recouver from the damage he inflicted on the nation.

I think Justin Trudeau is an empty-headed drama queen, with an inflated feeling of entitlement and without any life experience that even hints at a qualification as PM.

That said, I see no reason to critisize him for making money giving speeches.

Who cares???

If he can find a group of dimwits silly enough to pay him to blather on about nothing....more power to him!!!

Hardly an ethical concern.

 

[taxslave]

I think Pierre Trudeau was the worst PM we ever had, and I am not sure Canada will ever recouver from the damage he inflicted on the nation.

I think Justin Trudeau is an empty-headed drama queen, with an inflated feeling of entitlement and without any life experience that even hints at a qualification as PM.

That said, I see no reason to critisize him for making money giving speeches.

Who cares???

If he can find a group of dimwits silly enough to pay him to blather on about nothing....more power to him!!!

Hardly an ethical concern.

That is the amazing part. That people will pay to hear just in talk.

 

[Cliffy]

Why would anybody pay to hear anybody talk when we can get our daily requirement of BS for free right here on CC.

 

[JLM]

" I for one do not begrudge Justin Trudeau the trust fund now worth $1,242,000 that his old man provided for him so that he was taken care of and could bum around and dabble in various things in his 20s and 30s."

I'd say you do begrudge it or you wouldn't bring it up.........................Mensa-

Poor old Teddy- he just doesn't feel good until somebody else looks bad.-

 

[CDNBear]

Why would anybody pay to hear anybody talk when we can get our daily requirement of BS for free right here on CC.

Because you cut back on posting.

 

[SLM]

I'd have to say that, given a choice between an MP who earns money outside of the HOC and the endless parade of Senators who are playing fast and loose with expense accounts, I'd say the greater sin is with the latter group.

MP's are excessively overcompensated as a whole and I personally, as a voter and taxpayer, take great issue with their gold plated pension plan and lack of openness on their expense accounts. 'The Canadian public doesn't want to see the details of the receipts' is the most oft-used argument, well excuse me but we do because that is how we hold them accountable.

No Senator in this nation needs to maintain a residency outside of Ottawa and certainly if they do it should not be on the taxpayer's dime. No Senator needs to be spending the kind of excessive money on expenses as have been reported on recently. It's grotesque and incredibly insulting to the hard working men and women in this country that foot the bill. For years we've seen spending scandals, scandals involving conduct of members, even reports of serving Senators who are suffering from dementia. At what point do we stand up and say enough is enough. Clean up your act or get the hell out.

Why anyone would pay to listen to rhetoric from any Member of Parliament is beyond me, I guess they just have more money than brains. But that's their problem. Our problem is that the longer we continue to bicker and joust over stupid partisan goal scoring the longer the greedy wheel in Ottawa keeps turning and we all keep getting the shaft.

 

[taxslave]

I'd have to say that, given a choice between an MP who earns money outside of the HOC and the endless parade of Senators who are playing fast and loose with expense accounts, I'd say the greater sin is with the latter group.

MP's are excessively overcompensated as a whole and I personally, as a voter and taxpayer, take great issue with their gold plated pension plan and lack of openness on their expense accounts. 'The Canadian public doesn't want to see the details of the receipts' is the most oft-used argument, well excuse me but we do because that is how we hold them accountable.

No Senator in this nation needs to maintain a residency outside of Ottawa and certainly if they do it should not be on the taxpayer's dime. No Senator needs to be spending the kind of excessive money on expenses as have been reported on recently. It's grotesque and incredibly insulting to the hard working men and women in this country that foot the bill. For years we've seen spending scandals, scandals involving conduct of members, even reports of serving Senators who are suffering from dementia. At what point do we stand up and say enough is enough. Clean up your act or get the hell out.

Why anyone would pay to listen to rhetoric from any Member of Parliament is beyond me, I guess they just have more money than brains. But that's their problem. Our problem is that the longer we continue to bicker and joust over stupid partisan goal scoring the longer the greedy wheel in Ottawa keeps turning and we all keep getting the shaft.

I disagree. A senator, just like an MP should live in the area he/she theoretically represents. Since the senate does not sit every day senators should be out and about . By staying in Ottawa they become as out of touch with reality as the rest of the Ottawa crowd.
I think that it might make financial sense if the government owned a couple of apartment buildings for MPS and Senators instead of us paying rent for them.

 

[TeddyBallgame]

1. I think Pierre Trudeau was the worst PM we ever had, and I am not sure Canada will ever recouver from the damage he inflicted on the nation.

2. I think Justin Trudeau is an empty-headed drama queen, with an inflated feeling of entitlement and without any life experience that even hints at a qualification as PM.

3. That said, I see no reason to critisize him for making money giving speeches.

Who cares???

If he can find a group of dimwits silly enough to pay him to blather on about nothing....more power to him!!!

Hardly an ethical concern.

- Colby ... 1. I agree that PET was an unmitigated disaster for Canada and most of all on the economic and financial front and I happened to be in an administrative position in Ottawa during some of the orgy of waste and extravagance under Trudeau so I got to see it up close and personal before I finally quit in disgust and boredom.

2. I totally agree!

3. Well, I care and here`s why. When my great uncle was an MP in the 40s and early 50s, it was becoming but it was not yet really a full time job, parliament met for only a few months a year, it paid rather modestly because it wasn`t really a full time job, and so the old rules allowed MPs to do other things to earn a living as long as there was not a conflict of interest. Now, however, the job of being an effective MP is unquestionably a full time job and the pay and staff resources reflect this, and MPs no longer practice law or do other work on a regular basis because they can`t find the time to both properly serve their constituents and moonlight at other jobs. So if an MP is moonlighting by giving lucrative speeches through a speakers`bureau, he is spending time in preparing speeches, travelling to speech venues, and delivering speeches that should be spent serving his constituents in his riding or in parliament or on parliamentary committees. Therefore, such an MP is short changing his constituents and his party and his country due to his personal greed. As well, there is always a question of special access and influence ... elected members of parliament should be speaking without charge to as many groups of Canadians as their work schedule permits rather than giving special access to those groups who will pay the MP thousands of dollars over and above his hansome MP`s compensation to speak.

- This is precisely why none of the other Liberal leadership contenders nor any of the frontbenchers from any party speak for money and why they all find it wrong and why I do, too.

- And do not be confused by the usual Liberal lapdogs here who can`t defend the indefensible so resort to their usual attacks on me personally plus deliberately diverting attention and confusing the issue by pointing out that there are senators who engage in all manner of questionable activities. The senators are not elected by or responsible to the people, our undemocratic senate is increasingly a joke, and the sooner it is abolished the better for Canadians. In the meantime, we finally have a prime minister in Stephen Harper who is shrewd and strategic and masterful enough to be gradually reforming the senate despite great opposition principally from Liberal senators and the Quebec separatist government so that at least he is starting to curb its most egregious excesses. But anybody who justifies Justin`s greed by trotting out senators`malpractices is being either a political ***** for Trudeau or an uninformed idiot.

 

[Sal]

I'd have to say that, given a choice between an MP who earns money outside of the HOC and the endless parade of Senators who are playing fast and loose with expense accounts, I'd say the greater sin is with the latter group.

MP's are excessively overcompensated as a whole and I personally, as a voter and taxpayer, take great issue with their gold plated pension plan and lack of openness on their expense accounts. 'The Canadian public doesn't want to see the details of the receipts' is the most oft-used argument, well excuse me but we do because that is how we hold them accountable.

No Senator in this nation needs to maintain a residency outside of Ottawa and certainly if they do it should not be on the taxpayer's dime. No Senator needs to be spending the kind of excessive money on expenses as have been reported on recently. It's grotesque and incredibly insulting to the hard working men and women in this country that foot the bill. For years we've seen spending scandals, scandals involving conduct of members, even reports of serving Senators who are suffering from dementia. At what point do we stand up and say enough is enough. Clean up your act or get the hell out.

Why anyone would pay to listen to rhetoric from any Member of Parliament is beyond me, I guess they just have more money than brains. But that's their problem. Our problem is that the longer we continue to bicker and joust over stupid partisan goal scoring the longer the greedy wheel in Ottawa keeps turning and we all keep getting the shaft.

Communist.

 

[taxslave]

- Colby ... 1. I agree that PET was an unmitigated disaster for Canada and most of all on the economic and financial front and I happened to be in an administrative position in Ottawa during some of the orgy of waste and extravagance under Trudeau so I got to see it up close and personal before I finally quit in disgust and boredom.

2. I totally agree!

3. Well, I care and here`s why. When my great uncle was an MP in the 40s and early 50s, it was becoming but it was not yet really a full time job, parliament met for only a few months a year, it paid rather modestly because it wasn`t really a full time job, and so the old rules allowed MPs to do other things to earn a living as long as there was not a conflict of interest. Now, however, the job of being an effective MP is unquestionably a full time job and the pay and staff resources reflect this, and MPs no longer practice law or do other work on a regular basis because they can`t find the time to both properly serve their constituents and moonlight at other jobs. So if an MP is moonlighting by giving lucrative speeches through a speakers`bureau, he is spending time in preparing speeches, travelling to speech venues, and delivering speeches that should be spent serving his constituents in his riding or in parliament or on parliamentary committees. Therefore, such an MP is short changing his constituents and his party and his country due to his personal greed. As well, there is always a question of special access and influence ... elected members of parliament should be speaking without charge to as many groups of Canadians as their work schedule permits rather than giving special access to those groups who will pay the MP thousands of dollars over and above his hansome MP`s compensation to speak.

- This is precisely why none of the other Liberal leadership contenders nor any of the frontbenchers from any party speak for money and why they all find it wrong and why I do, too.

- And do not be confused by the usual Liberal lapdogs here who can`t defend the indefensible so resort to their usual attacks on me personally plus deliberately diverting attention and confusing the issue by pointing out that there are senators who engage in all manner of questionable activities. The senators are not elected by or responsible to the people, our undemocratic senate is increasingly a joke, and the sooner it is abolished the better for Canadians. In the meantime, we finally have a prime minister in Stephen Harper who is shrewd and strategic and masterful enough to be gradually reforming the senate despite great opposition principally from Liberal senators and the Quebec separatist government so that at least he is starting to curb its most egregious excesses. But anybody who justifies Justin`s greed by trotting out senators`malpractices is being either a political ***** for Trudeau or an uninformed idiot.

If memory serves, when one becomes an MP or MLA one must put their assets in a blind trust so their position theoretically can have no influence. This being the case Just In , or any other politician for that matteris breaking that rule because by charging for a speech he is having a direct influence on his business.