Looks like Pamela Wallin has ripped off $300,000

[Sal]

Too many trees in the way once you get 15 miles East of here.

If you want results, make ALL politicians sign a contract that says they do jail time for any and all f*ck ups.

you can't do that because honest human error is bound to happen, it would make coverups more certain and also 'f*ck up' is subjective, apparently according to your party leanings... the other side always sees everything as a f*ck up unless of course when their party does the same thing, then it was a brilliant move.

we are too stupid to have good government

 

[petros]

An error can be proven as an error.

 

[Dixie Cup]

Removing senators a difficult task under the Constitution | CTV News

Under the Constitution, a senator can be removed for five reasons:

If for two consecutive Sessions of the Parliament he fails to give his Attendance in the Senate;

If he takes an Oath or makes a Declaration or Acknowledgment of Allegiance, Obedience, or Adherence to a Foreign Power, or does an Act whereby he becomes a Subject or Citizen, or entitled to the Rights or Privileges of a Subject or Citizen, of a Foreign Power

If he is adjudged Bankrupt or Insolvent, or applies for the Benefit of any Law relating to Insolvent Debtors, or becomes a public Defaulter;

If he is attainted of Treason or convicted of Felony or of any infamous Crime;

If he ceases to be qualified in respect of Property or of Residence; provided, that a Senator shall not be deemed to have ceased to be qualified in respect of Residence by reason only of his residing at the Seat of the Government of Canada while holding an Office under that Government requiring his Presence there.


It could be difficult to kick Brazeau out of Senate even if he is convicted: experts | iPolitics
However, even if he is convicted of the charges laid against him last week it might be difficult to force Senator Patrick Brazeau out of his $132,300 a year Senate seat before he is scheduled to retire in 2049.

“We have rules, they can’t kick him out,” said retired Senator Jack Austin, former chairman of the Senate’s rules committee. “They need a bill to kick him out.”

According to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, the last time the section of the constitution that allows a senator to be removed was used was 1915. Experts say removing Brazeau could involve legislation as well as resorting to an archaic legal concept rooted in Ancient Rome.

In fact, the concept of committing an “infamous crime,” one of the grounds that can be used to remove a senator, is so archaic that a number of Canadian law professors contacted by iPolitics were unable to shed any light on how the term should be interpreted or what crimes would qualify. Legal dictionaries vary in their definitions but most refer to crimes that involve fraud or dishonesty.

“That phrase ‘infamous crime’ was written in another time and another context,” said Robert Marleau, former clerk of the House of Commons and co-editor of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, published in 2000. “What I would say is both the criminal law summary indictment or criminal code has evolved since those phrases were used.”

“I don’t think you’re going to find someone who can give you a specific definition of what is infamous in terms of law,” he added. “I’ve never seen one.”

If Brazeau and his ilk can't be kicked out because of their fraud, I am outraged and changes need to be made immediately. Unbelievable!

JMO

However, Deloitte says Senate rules about residence are unclear.

That is part of the problem...lack of clarity which leaves things open to personal interpretation. What other job allows you to make the rules up as you deem fit?

In what way is it unclear - that's what I want to know. Having to live more than 100 miles (shouldn't be KM) from Ottawa seems pretty clear to me.

JMO

 

[damngrumpy]

No trial yet to be sure but the more we hear and the more we see leads one to believe
there had better be a trail. I think the time has come to just do an audit on the whole
lot of them and find out just what the hell the Red Chamber is spending its money on.
The words of David Lewis ring true here. It is a case of Tweedle dee dee and tweedle
dee dum as there are Liberal Senators in trouble as well.
It also demonstrates what neglecting chumps we all are as we just let it go on for years
and we still chose sides and defend the institution.

 

[Dixie Cup]

Actually it's already costing you much more than a full penny. She is just the tip of the iceberg as far as white collar theft is concerned, it's beyond epidemic proportions and the theft itself is just the tip of the iceberg of other problems. This attitude of entitlement is a fast growing "cancer". You're in a good position to get a movement happening, Petros- from your place to Ottawa is just a short hike across flat ground. -

I agree. I think an audit should be done on all Senators and MP's and then expenses posted on the web from now on in. That's transparency!!

JMHO

Oh, forgot to add, any more dubious expenses by any one of them, (including the current ones) should be charged with fraud, loose their pensions and fired. A bit of a jail term would be good too. Then maybe these a***h***'s would get the msg.

JMHO (again).

 

[#juan]

I bet young Justin has a smile on his face a mile wide! -

Now that is probably right. Keep this stuff going another year and a half and Harper might as well hand over the keys to J.T... Ya gotta luv it when the opposition does most of your work for you.

 

[JLM]

Now that is probably right. Keep this stuff going another year and a half and Harper might as well hand over the keys to J.T... Ya gotta luv it when the opposition does most of your work for you.

I suppose if young Justin did get to be P.M. we might see a year of fairly honest gov't.!

 

[L Gilbert]

Ya know, I bet that even before the Gliberal gov'ts set up the rules, they had already figured out the loopholes and were just a jumpin at the gates to experiment with the loopholes.

 

[JLM]

Ya know, I bet that even before the Gliberal gov'ts set up the rules, they had already figured out the loopholes and were just a jumpin at the gates to experiment with the loopholes.

You know damn well, none of the rotten bastards can be good for too long! -

 

[Goober]

You know damn well, none of the rotten bastards can be good for too long! -

JLM, I know you are a closet Liberal.Yes I am LMAO now.:lol::lol::lol:

Chris Selley: Pamela Wallin’s behaviour disappointing, even in best case scenario | National Post

Let’s assume that the many thousands of dollars in travel expenses she and her staff admitted were improperly billed to the Senate were an honest mistake.

Let’s accept Ms. Wallin’s claims that auditors unfairly applied new spending rules retroactively — despite Deloitte’s claim that the basic “principles of the [travel] policy did not change; i.e., that travel costs would be reimbursed if the purpose of the travel was to carry out the Senator’s parliamentary functions.”

Let’s assume, though he denies it, that former chair of the Senate’s internal economy committee, fellow Conservative senator David Tkachuk, did indeed tell Sen. Wallin that as she was “active in the community, representing the Senate” (as Deloitte puts it), she could claim expenses for activities such as her duties serving as chancellor of the University of Guelph.

Let’s assume, though he denies it, that Sen. Tkachuk also told Sen. Wallin she should retroactively edit her Outlook calendar to include dozens of items of “Senate business” that hadn’t been there before (Deloitte had archived copies) and to polish up some other calendar items that looked distinctly partisan in nature: for example, “Saskatoon Event (4 riding fundraiser)” mysteriously became “Saskatoon Event.”

Let’s assume that Sen. Wallin genuinely believed that in addition to her chancellor duties at Guelph, she was also entitled to claim travel expenses to attend Conservative and Ontario Progressive Conservative party fundraisers, corporate functions for Porter Airlines (she had sat on the board), an event honouring Brian Mulroney, the 2011 Juno Awards, and a federal election-night television panel in Toronto where she represented the Conservatives.


Let’s assume she genuinely thought she was allowed to claim a flight to Toronto (in the words of her office) “to catch a flight the next day to Punta Cana” to speak at a women’s conference at which she had been invited to speak.

Let’s assume that she genuinely considered the following to represent legitimate “Senate business”: a meeting with the “Chair of the Board for a publishing company re: media and government relations”; a meeting with the “Executive Director of [an] awards foundation … to discuss [an] upcoming awards presentation and her role as Co-Host”; and a meeting “regarding a book project to discuss approaching leading business and political figures (herself included).”

That’s the best case scenario for Sen. Wallin now: She meant well, made a few admitted mistakes, was doing her job as she understood it and billed Canadians for what she thought was allowed.

But there has never been any rule demanding that Senators claim back every single thing they think they might be able to get away with. Deloitte, the RCMP and perhaps prosecutors will need to consult the rule book in order to judge Sen. Wallin — which explains her Hail Mary complaint about the supposedly altered rules. Ordinary Canadians don’t need the rule book in the slightest.

With apologies to Samuel Johnson, rules are the last refuge of a scoundrel

The best-case scenario above would reveal Pamela Wallin as someone who didn’t just think it was allowed, but appropriate, to ding the Canadian taxpayer on behalf of the University of Guelph, Porter Airlines, the Juno Awards and the Conservative Party of Canada; and to alter incriminating calendar entries, and update dozens of others, in order to justify travel expenses. Whatever the rules say, that’s transparently skeevy behaviour.

With apologies to Samuel Johnson, rules are the last refuge of a scoundrel. No one held a gun to Sen. Wallin’s head. And neither reimbursement nor a shrug from the RCMP can rehabilitate her reputation on its own — nor can it restore any faith in or respect for the Senate and Parliament. “Technically allowed” and “not criminal” are miserable standards to hold oneself to. We have a right to expect better from all Canadians, and a higher standard still from parliamentarians — but at this point, we would be fools to expect the latter.

Senators, either individually or en masse, need to provide concrete evidence that shenanigans from the likes of Pamela Wallin, Mike Duffy and Mac Harb really are shocking aberrations. Failing that, we’re going to need a lot more auditors.

 

[JLM]

JLM, I know you are a closet Liberal.Yes I am LMAO now.:lol::lol::lol:

Chris Selley: Pamela Wallin’s behaviour disappointing, even in best case scenario | National Post

Let’s assume that the many thousands of dollars in travel expenses she and her staff admitted were improperly billed to the Senate were an honest mistake.

Hey, man, I ain't closet nuthin'! I was a dedicated N.D.P. supporter for 30 years because I thought they were for the working man. I finally figured out, they were for the sh*t disturber, parasite and drone, but they weren't interested in anyone who was serious about working and productivity, they were just interested in collecting dues and getting votes. I don't like or trust ANY of the bastards. In philosophy I'm a bit of a conservative in that I like to stretch the dollar by making full use and reusing stuff, and I detest waste, but that is as far as it goes.

 

[Goober]

Hey, man, I ain't closet nuthin'! I was a dedicated N.D.P. supporter for 30 years because I thought they were for the working man. I finally figured out, they were for the sh*t disturber, parasite and drone, but they weren't interested in anyone who was serious about working and productivity, they were just interested in collecting dues and getting votes. I don't like or trust ANY of the bastards. In philosophy I'm a bit of a conservative in that I like to stretch the dollar by making full use and reusing stuff, and I detest waste, but that is as far as it goes.

Not what I heard.

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/wreck-beach/117980-jlm-closet-liberal-my-god.html

 

[JLM]

Not what I heard.

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/wreck-beach/117980-jlm-closet-liberal-my-god.html

Just heard on C.B.C. news that sweet little Pamela now owes just under $139,000............maybe she should agree to pay it off NOW if they will quit searching.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sto...mela-wallin-senator-additional-repayment.html