REQUIEM FOR THE PRIME MINISTER

 

When the Mike Duffy kerfuffle first broke, I said in a Blog at that time that it was not plausible that the Prime Minister had not known in advance of Nigel Wright’s $90 k gift … but as no one other than Wright and the PM appeared to know otherwise – the benefit of a doubt should be extended to him.

That slight strand of benefit was then stretched even further when it was subsequently determined that a ‘cast of thousands’ knew beforehand of the Wright / Duffy gift. 

But again, I was prepared to give our Prime Minister the benefit of the doubt … much more reluctantly though.

Now that it has been revealed by Duffy that the PC Party even went so far as to pay his not so insignificant legal bill – some $13k plus, it causes me to conclude that our Prime Minister was in on all of this from the very beginning despite his protestations to the contrary.

The strand broke.

And as I have previously said, should this day ever come, Harper would have no other choice but to resign since his credibility would be irreparably impaired.

The Tory Convention taking place this weekend in Calgary would provide a proper forum for him to announce it…after-all, it is the folks in the Party that he has so badly let down.

Will he do so?  I don’t know since he certainly cannot be pushed out, but I do think his resignation is coming soon – within days or weeks…not months.

“Why do you think that Galagher?”

Because despite the fact that he has lied to us, Harper is at heart an honourable man.

If we were speaking of someone like Chretien, my thoughts of course would be otherwise.

And the irony in all of this is that Harper’s lie was to ensure that tax payer’s money was returned to them.

This has got to be a first in politics and most certainly will be studied in the classes of Political Science for years to come.

But I can just hear the lefties now:

‘Harper lied to us; we can no longer trust him (not that they ever did). What will he do next?  Lower taxes? There is no end to what this guy might do’.

Bizarre.

Brought down by pygmies.

And we’ll all be the poorer for it.

Count on it.

As I see it…

‘K.D. Galagher’

 

One Man’s Plan For A Reformed Senate…

 

After reading my recent Blog – The Three Stooges, an acquaintance of mine … Parliament Hill Harry (PHH for short) contacted me for the purpose of sharing his plan for a Reformed Senate.

The Plan itself is amazingly simple – in more ways than one – it allows for Members of Parliament, having been elected in five or more General Elections, to sit in a Reformed Senate – for life, which not too long ago was the accepted standard.

Anyway, PHH’s thinking is that it is non-politicians who come in and continually screw things up – so why not appoint only former politicians – “the guys and gals who have actually had to fight in the trenches” so to speak.

When he initially called me, he asked if I could live with his plan given my general distain for the institution and I had to be honest with him by saying no – ‘any unelected legislative body is doomed to failure’.

But PHH was not to be deterred – he said he had run the plan by a current member of the esteemed chamber (aka A Senator) and received some promising feedback.  He included with his plan a transcript of that feedback.

Here is how it went:

PHH… ‘You were once a successful politician who was elected several times to the House of Commons, would you not agree with me that the Senate would be a much better place if membership was confined to former M.P.s?”

A Senator… ‘You are on to something here Harry – its those darned former media types who come into this place (Senators continually refer to the Senate as this place as if there is really any danger of it being confused with the other place – the elected House of Commons …but I digress) and royally ball things up – they do not know how the game is played.  Simple as that.”

PHH…’So you could live with my plan?’

A Senator …’Maybe, but I do find one aspect of it troubling and that relates to the life term.  Now don’t get me wrong – I like the idea of an appointment for life (why wouldn’t he – he is currently 73 and will be obliged to leave the Senate upon attaining his 75th birthday) but we have to be practical here … what if a few of us come down with serious afflictions before we die – say dementia for instance?”

PHH… ‘That is all covered in the addendum to my Plan – should an Honourable Senator become incapacitated, his or her vote would automatically be considered cast for the Party he or she represents.’

A Senator …’Well that’s certainly thinking ahead there young feller’.  But what if there were instances where we wanted to vote against our own Party – I know if never happens.. but just what if..’.

PHH..’Can you provide me with a for instance?’

A Senator… ‘Well what if your own Party wanted to reduce the term of Senators – or God forbid, actually do away with the Senate – I would want my vote to be cast against it’.

PHH..’If you will read the small print in the same addendum it states that Honourable (sick) Senators can have their votes cast against their own Party if they have made instructions in advance of their affliction, that is to say, while they were fully compos.

So in the cases you suggested, all you would need do is let the Speaker of The Senate know in advance that should your mental health deteriorate on your way to 100, and should such an item come up for vote …your vote would be cast as a Nay – even if it was your own Party sponsoring the vote".’

A Senator..’Well Harry you have thought of everything, and in so doing you have preserved the role of the Senate as the place of sober second thought.  Congratulations.

I am all for it and I can assure you my fellow former House colleagues will be as well.

Now, should we adjourn to the lounge for a libation or two?  The Senate will of course pick-up the tab.

PHH .. ‘Capital idea Senator’.

So Galagher do you think my plan has legs?

Well Harry, if it has any chance for success you will need to win the Media over to your side and there is only one way you can do that.

PHH ..’Appoint Media Types to the Senate for life’.

Fraid so. 

As I see it…

‘K.D. Galagher’

 

LARRY..MOE..&..CURLY

 

As In:  Patrick, Mike and Pamela

When I was younger …okay much younger, I used to watch the Three Stooges on television.  It drove my mother crazy … I can still hear her say “Keith how can you watch such drivel”.

My answer was always the same…’I find them funny’.

I find Patty, Mikey and Pammy just as funny.

Here we have three characters given the appointment of a lifetime – to the Senate of Canada – no real work and RESPECT from the great unwashed …i.e. those who pay for the Stooges’ inflated salaries and for their considerable perks such as free travel passes for rail and air.

You would think that would be more than sufficient compensation for them …but no… the three have been caught with their collective hands in the taxpayers’ pockets grasping for more.

This is all sad of course and in this they do not resemble the famous three comedians.

No, the funny part – indeed the hilarious part – is that they are all appealing for ‘due process’ before their perks are taken away from them.

Where was the due process for the lowly taxpayer as they padded their expense accounts? 

So to watch them beg for justice is a bit rich.

But surprisingly, many are falling for their collective charade – some even want them totally pardoned – others, would be content to have them go on paid leave.  And good luck getting of that pay back when the eventual findings go against them –as they will, since the only issue now outstanding is the scale of their greed.

And the guy who defends the right to have taxpayer monies respected – our Prime Minister, is vilified in some quarters – most notably the left leaning media – for being too mean spirited.

It is to laugh out loud.

But there is something in all of this that is forgotten.

We are not dealing with common criminals or the falsely accused – who granted, would be entitled to the Rule of Law and all it can offer.

Rather, we are dealing with Politicians – where optics is in many respects more important than the truth itself.

Robert Stanfield – the best Prime Minister Canada never had – lost out many say because he was caught on camera eating a banana.

Joe Who – lost his luggage – and never lived it down.

Politics is not ordinary life – much depends on perception – for instance if a Party has members who are viewed as being too extreme – for the benefit of the rest – a Leader needs to distance the Party from them.

If you have members who are viewed as being too extravagant with the taxpayer’s dime – they too need to be cut loose a.s.a.p. for fear that the rest will end up being tarred with the same brush – e.g. Bev Oda and her $16 glass of orange juice.

Bevy did not receive ‘due process’ but as a politician, she got her just desserts.

When it comes to humour, the original Three Stooges are amateurs when up against the likes of Patty, Mikey and Pammy. But the three disgraced Senators are not alone – I suspect many of the Senate colleagues are shaken in their boots for fear that their own returns will sooner or late be exposed for audit.

Given the tears of laughter generated by the Senate Three – just imagine the hilarity that would result if up to 100 of their co-frares were also implicated. 

That said, long time readers will know my opinion of the Senate – a place for Hacks, Flacks and Ne’re-Do- Wells.

Patty, Mikey and Pammy have lived up to my low expectations of them.

And while our media is transfixed with their antics, the Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight – McGuinty / Wynne et al continue fleecing Ontarians out of Billions of Dollars.

The laughter continues and as the original three would have said…

YUK, YUK.

As I see it…

“K.D. Galagher’

 

Who Speaks For Canada?

 

Answer – it is the Canadian Cabinet along with her Majesty…the latter in more of a ceremonial sense.

How many voices does the Cabinet have?

But one.

The principle of Cabinet Solidarity is engrained in our Constitutional Monarchy system of Government.

So what gives with Denis Lebel, Federal Minister of Infrastructure, Communities, and Intergovernmental Affairs saying this past Monday that he is okay with Quebec separating on the basis of a bare majority – that is to say 50% plus 1 vote?

Does that not contradict the position of Prime Minister Harper and the rest of Cabinet?

It most certainly does – in fact Canada’s Cabinet is on record as recognizing a referendum result that is clear – which presumably would not entail a simple majority of 50% plus 1 -  and in that regard is in keeping with the Clarity Act which calls for “a clear majority” result.

This language is admittedly vague but can be argued that it does not allow for the bare majority vote supported by Minister Lebel.

So who speaks of Cabinet in this case?

Lebel or the rest of Cabinet?

A rhetorical question.

But Lebel’s stated position seriously undermines the Federal Cabinet – especially since he is also Harper’s Quebec Lieutenant.

So what to do.

Usually in such serious circumstances the offender is asked to step down from Cabinet.

More often, the offender himself has the integrity to do this without prodding as was done by Michael Chong when he resigned from Cabinet when it decided to recognize Quebec as a distinct nation.

What is obvious here is that Lebel’s personal belief mirrors that of the NDP Party more than it does his own.

If push comes to shove – with Quebec’s independence quest, things are going to get messy and we now know, the separatists have a friend on the inside.

And another reason for Cabinet Solidarity.

It would not be surprising if many of you were not aware of this – given the important Senate disputes occupying the time of our politicians and the media.

Heaven for bid – issues of real concern to our country receive our attention.

As I see it…

‘K.D. Galagher’

 

 

Harper’s Nemesis

 

Mike Duffy.

And the “Duff” will likely take him down.

In all of this, it is passing strange that Stephen Harper – one of Canada’s greatest critics of the Senate, could well end up falling on his sword for appointing Duffy and a few others as Senators.

After all, it was Harper who desperately wanted the Senate to be either an elected body or go the way of the Great Dodo. (The Provinces blocked him in the former while the Liberals stood against him in the latter).

From the very beginning Harper pledged Senate Reform and even promised not to appoint another Senator unless he or she was elected in their province of origin.  When but a couple came forward, he was forced to get into the appointment business since to do otherwise would leave his party’s agenda at the mercy of Liberal Senate Majority.

So from my perspective Prime Minister Harper has the cleanest hands of all when it comes to doing something with the current Senate and its bunch of ne’er-do-well hangers-on. 

That leads me back to the Duff.

Today he came out to blame his female staffer – “suffering from post partum depression” as the reason his accounts were improperly filed.  I am not speaking about his housing expenses – since I concede that there is much ambiguity surrounding that issue.

Rather I am speaking about his apparent charging both the Conservatives and the Senate for his travel expenses at the time of the last election.

I am also referring to his “disabled friend” whom the Duff paid $65k for in the words of that friend “doing nothing”.

Many are coming out now in defence of Duffy saying he is being scapegoated – the same who said just a week earlier that Harper had to get rid of Duffy et al to restore the integrity (?) of the Senate.

You cannot have it both ways – you cannot stand in Harper’s way when he initially set out to reform the Senate and then later demand he jettison certain wayward Senators – and once done – be critical of the doing.  It is absurd. 

It unfortunately, is also the way politics works.

And Mike Duffy knows this fully as well as the fact that one is appointed for political purposes and can be summarily dismissed for those self same purposes.

I suffered a similar fate earlier in my governmental career but I was dumped for the sole fact that I was deemed to be a Tory when a Liberal Government came in.

I digress.

As I have said in an earlier blog – I think Mr. Harper may have slipped up.

He announced soon after it was revealed that he had no prior knowledge that his Chief of Staff had given Duffy the tidy sum of $90k to repay the Senate.  (You remember this – Duffy first telling the media that it was his own money and that he and his wife had decided to voluntarily pay back the Senate etc etc).

As I said in my earlier Blog – I find it difficult to believe that the Prime Minister did not have advanced knowledge of this questionable loan.

I said then and I stand by it, Mr. Harper is entitled to the benefit of the doubt.

I fear though that given subsequent revelations that several in his office knew in advance – along with Duffy’s now apparent vindictive attitude, we may be on the verge of a startling revelation.

One that could very well spell the end of Harper’s Prime Ministership.  

It would be too bad since, in all of this, Harper – despite what you may think of him on a personal level – is one of the very few good guys left on the Hill.

And I will tell you something else – if worse does come to worse for Harper – he too knows how the game is played – and I predict he will accept his fate without a whimper.

As I see it…

‘K.D. Galagher’

Who’s On First ?

 

I have had an arrangement with a local chiropractor here in Ottawa and part of that arrangement is that he bills directly to my one and only and seldom used credit card.

Well the chiropractor did such a good job that most of my aches and pains have vanished so I decided to discontinue treatment.

Given that I do not trust computer programs etc. I thought that it would be safe to call my credit card provider and ask them to de-authorize this monthly charge – i.e although I trust my chiropractor – it would not surprise me in the least if further charges inadvertently got charged to my credit card account.

With that brief background, let’s now listen in on my call to the Credit Card Company:

Nice lady answers the phone and I explain that I wish to de-authorize the regular monthly payment to my chiropractor.

Nice lady responds “No can do”.

“Why not ?” I reply.

“Because you have an agreement with your chiropractor to make these monthly payments” she informs me.

“But that agreement is between my chiropractor and myself and has nothing to do with your credit card company”.

“Sorry” she says.

“Okay then – let’s just cancel my card – I can at least do that, can’t I ?”

“You most certainly can sir but it won’t stop the monthly deductions” she asserts.

“Let me get this straight – I can cancel my card with you but you will still honour the monthly deduction”.

“Precisely” she states.

“Dear lady I have a contract with your credit card company – I decide to whom I want you to make payments and in return for that I pay your monthly statement.  Why I have decided that you cease making payments to my chiropractor is quite frankly none of your company’s business”.

This is met with silence.

“Make I speak with your manager”

In due course her manager comes on the line.

“May I help you”.

I explain what I had earlier explained to their lady agent and her manager begins with the following …

“Your agreement with your chiropractor has nothing to do with us”.

“Finally” I reply – “we are in agreement”.

“So what I can do for you?” manager inquires.

“De-authorize the monthly payment”

“No can do” he responds.

“Why not” says I.

“You have approved the monthly deduction” he states.

“Yes I have and now I want de-approve it”.

“You have to cancel it with them first” he responds.

“Okay then, just cancel the card”.

“Won’t do you any good since we will still honour the monthly charges as they come in”.

“You have to be kidding – as you stated at the beginning my contract with the chiropractor and my contract with your company are two distinct contracts… they have nothing to do with one another.”

“You are quite correct but we will still process the monthly charge”.

“Even when my card is cancelled”.

“Correct”

“Well sir, you can go ahead and do that – just don’t expect me to pay your monthly statement”.

“Your credit will be damaged sir”.

“And I will let the Credit Bureau know of the stupidity leading up to it”.

Silence.

“Okay how do you see this being handled” I asked with frustration.

“Cancel your contract with your chiropractor and then let us know at which point we can de-authorize the monthly charge to your credit card”

“And how do you suggest I go about cancelling that contract”

“That is entirely between you and your chiropractor … your contract with him has nothing to do with us”.

“But you just told me to cancel that contract and then you will de-authorize the monthly payment – so I just want to make sure I cancel it in a way in which your company finds acceptable. For instance, can I cancel the contract by telephone?”

“Yes you can”.

And then I call you and tell you the contract has been cancelled”.

“Precisely”

“But how can I prove it has been cancelled other than by my telling you it has?”

“We will ascertain at that point whether or not a telephone cancellation is sufficient”.

“So it may not be sufficient”

“Precisely – we will have to involve another department here to determine that.”

“Can I speak to that other department now – so I can avoid any mis-steps”.

“No – you must first cancel your contract with your chiropractor”

“And this is the contract that your credit card company has no interest in”.

“Precisely”

“Have you ever watched the skit between Abbot and Costello called ‘Who’s On First’ ?”

“No – I do not see how it would be relevant to our discussion Sir”

“Just listen to it”

As I see it …

‘K.D. Galagher’

Finally … A Politician With Some Common Sense.

 

As in British Prime Minister David Cameron and his plan to drop all those under 25 years from the roles of the dole and unemployment insurance.

Rather, he wants these loafers to either get a job or continue in school / job training & apprenticeship.

What a novel sensible idea.  If allowed to be implemented, it would - with one fell swoop – end what too often ends in a life time of dependency on the State.

I can just hear the left wing now moaning and groaning about how inhumane this would be, but in fact, it would restore their dignity and self reliance. 

It would also save the Treasury a great deal of money.

In contrast, food stamp usage in the United States has ballooned to over 50 million citizens under the current occupant of the White House and those on Government Assistance exceeds 100 million – 1/3 of America’s population.

In order to have a healthy vibrant society, we need to have as many as possible positively contribute and PM Cameron’s proposal will go a long way indeed to ensure that this happens.

In the current Nanny State Mentality evident here in Canada and in the West generally, it is difficult to see this happening.

Too bad; especially for those for whom they are intended.

As I see it…

‘K. D. Galagher’