04.11.2011 05:10 PM

Email from a Liberal in Ottawa

“Warren, as an FYI…during the last meeting of Public Accounts, Liberals brought forward a motion to call on the AG to release the very report that had part of it released today…whether the House was sitting [or not]. The Tories AND the NDP voted against it.”


  1. The report released today was a “draft”, was it not? Why would the AG release a draft report? Or were they asking for the final version to be released? Because that’s not “the very report that had part of it released today”.

    If I were a journalist/media type, I would not want to report on this document as though it were factual in anyway. Whenever the final version is released, it will likely be different from whatever was released today, and anybody who reported on the false document released today will look like they simply participated in a nefarious plot to take Harper down a notch. This whole story has Wafer-Gate written all over it.

    • Namesake says:

      the A-G did ^NOT release it.

      Someone who had a copy — who presumably is thus a bureaucrat working in the federal Department the AG released it to for their possible feedback — contacted the reporter Joan Bryden.

      And as Ms. Bryden just explained on Power & Politics, that anonymous source showed it to her in person, because it would be illegal to copy or release it. And it wasn’t a false document, it was one of a very limited number of numbered original copies released by the AG Office itself.

      But as Ian Capstick & Ms. Bryden point out, the more curious thing is how John Baird happened to know the contents of the subsequent draft, since as Gov’t House Leader w/o an active portfolio of his own, he WOULDN’T have been sent a copy to comment on.

      • Wayne says:

        Fife and others are reporting it was a member of the opposition. Stinks.

        • Namesake says:

          sloppy reportage there, Wayne: it was not “a member of the opposition” who contacted Bryden, which denotes an Opposition MP — none of whom were in receipt of a copy;

          it was someone who supports one of the opposition parties outside of work: you know, like about two-thirds of the population.

        • smelter rat says:

          You’re tossing around a lot of unsubstantiated accusations Gord. The heat getting to you?

      • Namesake says:

        ok, so maybe Baird had reason to see the reports, after all… seems he was Infrastructure Minister at the time; but not the tweeting Sparrow et al.; as someone points out on another thread here, Kady’s quoted the reg’s here to show that sure seems like a breach of confidentiality: http://urlm.in/hmwo

    • Apparently you aren’t paying attention Peter.

      Meanwhile… as seen on Twitter, former Auditor General says what the current AG, Sheila Fraser, can’t:

      Tories G8 spending scandal ‘a legal issue’, says former auditor

      Personally I believe that Harper and Flaherty lying about the state of the economy and Canada’s finances in Election 2008 was a *way* bigger deal.

      BREAKING: Baird justifies 50 million spent saying “Conservatives give the people what they want, bums with handles.” (apologies to Dylan)

  2. Ron says:

    now why do you suppose they would want that to happen
    did they have access to a draft copy?

    • Namesake says:


      a) EVERY A-G report has something embarrassing / critical to say about the sitting govt

      b) the last report that concerned the stimulus spending just looked at the speed they were, um, shoveling it out the door, where they got good grades, but THIS one was going to look at whether there was any actual value for all the money that was being spent, where it was expected she would explode the mythical claims about all the jobs that were being produced. And she might also comment on how a disproportionate amount of the overly expensively advertized (and signed) projects were located in CPC ridings.

      And, yup, I sure WOULD like to see that chapter released, too.

  3. Jamie Rothwell says:

    Do you think there will be any spare tin foil lying around after this? Im short and I need some for the bbq.

  4. Brad says:

    Things don’t seem to going Steve’s way these days, couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

  5. catherine says:

    Another site is reporting that the Bloc members voted with the Liberals in having the report released even if Parliament wasn’t sitting, but the NDP voted with the Conservatives against release. Any idea why the NDP would support the CPC in this?

  6. Chubsy Ubsy says:

    The NHL playoffs are about to start. I doubt anyone is paying attention until (maybe) the week before the election.

  7. kitt says:

    Oh boy… I’m choking on the dust from all the spinning from the Reformatories. They just recycle the same excuse over and over and over……

  8. Dr.J says:

    I know this is the new Liberal “Game Changer”……for the record this is game changer #256

  9. Namesake says:

    Odd thing about this motion, which the Blogger ‘Eugene Forsey Liberal’ noted earlier today & Rob Silver picked up on tonight, is that we’d probably all have that report at our disposal right now if it weren’t for an NDP Member going along with the CPC Members who insisted that the Lib. Member shouldn’t even be allowed to table such a motion without 2 days’ notice: http://urlm.in/hmwt

    which not only puts the lie, again, to the idea that there’s a coalition afoot b/w the NDP & the Libs (since here the NDP were running interference on the CPC’s behalf), but also to the CPC’s new claim that they’d be only too happy to release that report if they could, and that they’ve got nothing to hide. Because only 3 weeks ago, they DID object most vociferously to even being asked to release the final AG report early if an election were called.

  10. beary says:

    NDP voted against the motion with Conservatives because they were hoping it would get them something extra in the Conservative budget. Btw, journalists FLIPPED OUT today about this, particularly because nobody should have copies of these reports. And in the case of Robert Fife, he was given an actual COPY by a Conservative MP he said on air. I’m surprised he took it because that is illegal, both copying and distributing and accepting. Joan Bryden managed to report on it without breaking the law by taking a copy.

    Anyway, NDP are and have been propping up the Cons, going back to Paul Martin.

  11. fritz says:

    Gord, at this point in the campaign all the Tories are concerned about is preserving a slim minority. But even if you were correct and they were close to winning a majority the policies that are proposed in this article are anathema to the majority of Canadians. Don’t forget Harper’s support has always topped out at around 35%-40%. Their opposition has always received around 60%-65% of the vote.

    Assuming a small minority for the CPC; your assumption that they would quickly be defeated is wrong too as they will dump a pile of money into Quebec in an attempt to buy the support of the BQ; a CPC/BQ ‘coalition’ so to speak.

    Even if the government was quickly defeated by the other three parties the Liberals could take over and govern successfully for a long time without forming a ‘coalition’ with the NDP. All they need is the policy support of two of the other opposition partisan for their legislation. this is something the Liberals can obtain much more easily than the CPC as Liberal policies are much closer to their philosophy than the Tories ideas such as mega prisons, corporate tax cuts etc.

    As to the kind of legislation they would pass I assume it would be policies as described in the new ‘Red Book’ which are center to center left, which is where the majority of Canadians sit.

  12. smelter rat says:

    You’re funny Gord!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.