About those donations to the PCs from the Calgary Zoo

I was going to blog about the illegal donations to the PCs from the Calgary Zoo story the other day when the story originally broke but decided against it as illegal donation stories to the Alberta Progressive Conservatives seem to be all I have been blogging about lately. But here we go again, but this time with a twist.

The original story was broken by the Wildrose on Wednesday with details that the "Calgary Zoo Inc" was issued 2 tax receipts from the Banff-Cochrane Progressive Conservative Association for a total of $725.00. This of course appears to be another in the long line of illegal donations that the PCAA has received over the last few year as "The Calgary Zoo is wholly owned by the City of Calgary and as such under the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosures Act [Section 1 (l)] it is prohibited from contributing to political parties."

Seems pretty clear cut; another in the latest of a long line of illegal donation stories had come to surface but early Thursday came a response from the Calgary Zoo who in full spin mode were trying to explain the donations. From The Calgary Herald: But a spokesperson, Laurie Skene, said the zoo is not wholly owned by the City of Calgary and broke no law when it made a contribution to a golf fundraiser event for Banff-Cochrane MLA Janis Tarchuk.

It looks like the Zoo is trying to parse words here in an effort to defend themselves but it doesn't really matter if the City of Calgary 'wholly' owns the zoo, owns 1% or owns 99% because the issue is a total red herring.

Let me explain.

First off the Wildrose claim that the Calgary Zoo is wholly owned by the City of Calgary is not 100% accurate, but that is no fault of the Wildrose as that exact wording appears on the zoo website: The Calgary Zoo is owned by the City of Calgary, which has entered into an operating agreement with the Calgary Zoological Society to manage the facility on behalf of the citizens of this city. 

So what is the truth? From their financials it appears that the City of Calgary does indeed own the zoo; that is it owns the land and the buildings (not sure on the animals but that doesn't really matter), and provides the zoo with taxpayer dollars to operate. Calgary though does not run the zoo, that is done by the Calgary Zoological Society who have a contract with the city to run it until 2015 and this seems to be what the zoo spokesperson was using to cloud the issue of who exactly owns the zoo, and of course whether they are allowed to contribute to a political party. But as I noted earlier it does not matter in the least because even if the city owned 1% of the zoo and the Zoological Society the other 99%  (here is that twist I mentioned earlier)

The Calgary Zoological Society is a "not-for-profit organization and is a registered charity under the Income Tax Act of Canada" and cannot by law make any donations to any political party or candidate at any level of government.

By playing word games trying to defend themselves from possible violations of Alberta elections law they have all but admitted to breaking federal law and risk losing their non profit charitable status. Well done Calgary Zoo, well done.  Anyone from the CRA listening?


Quick AM update:


One last question: I know that the PC supporters are always trying to spin the multitude of illegal donations as simple mistakes or one offs, but I have to ask. How is it possible to issue 2 tax recipients to a group named "Calgary Zoo Inc" and not have any questions come up or alarm bells go off saying that something might not be right here?  Remember; it is this very same party that we have entrusted with looking after all of Alberta's finances.

This donation scandal becomes a national embarrassment."If Albertans get angry enough to rid themselves of their one-party state, perhaps they will come to understand the best part of democracy: Our ability to kick the bastards out of office."

Alberta deserves better. Let's give the PCs the boot.

More illegal donations from AHS to the Alberta Progressive Conservative party...

You have to wait hours before even seeing a doctor in our emergency rooms and months to see a specialist. They think nothing of putting Granny on a stretcher and parking her as the third patient in room designed only to hold 2 patients after waiting a day in the emergency department.

But yet they have the time and extra money to donate to Redford's PC party.

Calgary Laboratory Services, which describes itself as a “wholly-owned subsidiary” of the Superboard, donated $3,000 to the PCs in 2004 and $850 in both 2009 and 2010, according to Elections Alberta disclosure statements.

CLS was incorporated in 1996 with the former Calgary Health Region (CHR) as the 49% owner and MDS Kasper Laboratories as the majority owner. Before 2006, MDS sold 25% of its share to CHR and on April 4, 2006 sold its remaining 25% to CHR – making the Alberta government through CHR the sole owner of Calgary Lab Services. 

Update: Donations confirmed by Alberta Health Services Chief Financial Officer: Chris Mazurkewich, the Chief Financial Officer of AHS, admitted this morning that the donations took place, were wrong and AHS would begin an internal investigation immediately.


This is beyond believable that this type of thing can occur in Alberta, but after 40 yrs of 1 party rule it is inevitable.

We need a change of government now. It is the only thing that will stop the rot.

It makes it tough for Redford to blame the victim if the PCs are the ones doing the asking.

In what has become an almost daily occurrence in Alberta, new revelations come out about the Progressive Conservatives and illegal donations.

Since 2007, the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta has sent at least 16 explicit invites to their Premier’s Dinner fundraisers to groups prohibited by law from attending, the Wildrose Caucus revealed today. “Please join us in our evening of appreciation knowing that your support and the support of others will contribute to a strong provincial PC party,” reads a letter sent from PC Alberta to Thorhild County, inviting them to attend the Premier’s Dinner held on Aug. 24, 2011.  Many more examples can be found at link.

According to Section 34(1)(2) of the Election Finances and Contributions Distribution Act, it is illegal for political parties to solicit money from groups such as municipalities, school districts and post-secondary schools.

So far the standard PC spin has been that it is not their fault and decided that blaming the victims rather than taking any responsibility was the way to deal with this mess. Essentially saying that municipalities and prohibited groups such as schools are the ones in error because they gave the PC's the money, no matter that the PCs happily cashed those cheques and have yet to return any of the money (using this money would also be against the law), but considering that the PCs have been actively soliciting municipalities and other prohibited groups makes their desperate attempts at spin all the more laughable.

Speaking of laughable:

Redford: "and we are going to have no part in any kind of practice or procedure that would suggest that that was acceptable." (remember that the newest of these allegations involve a dinner for Premier Redford)






The problem appears to be systemic:

http://thealbertaardvark.blogspot.com/2012/01/it-keeps-getting-worse-pcs-accepted-15k.html

 http://thealbertaardvark.blogspot.com/2012/01/its-firday-time-for-another-illegal.html

And making matter worse is the fact that the PCs are not only blaming the victims but are hiding behind Alberta election laws (which they conveniently wrote) that keeps these investigations and findings private, out of the public view.

The PCAA has to go, Albertans deserve better than this.

A question for Alberta PC supporters.

Actually this may turn out to be more than one question over the next little while but for today I would like to ask the PCAA supporters who read this blog a question. Of course others are also welcome to add their 2 cents as well.

What was the last thing that Alberta's PC government has done, legislation wise, that you would consider to be 'conservative'? 

I have a long list of things that this government has done that nobody in their right mind would consider as being conservative but that will have to wait as now it is your turn to give examples of conservative legislation or policy from our government.

The comments are open.

The future under Alison Redford?

(coming soon to a local paper near you)
  
A family celebration took a strange twist yesterday for an Alberta Family:

A mother was fined  yesterday for smoking while her 18 year old son present with her in the car.

She had just picked up her son, a private in the Canadian Armed Forces, after he had recently returned from duty in Afghanistan as part of Canada's ongoing training of the Afghan Army when police stopped her and issued the fine. The 2 were headed to a family gathering celebrating the sons return and the mother had just informed her son that he would not be able to drink any alcohol at the celebration due to recent changes to Alberta's drinking age brought in by Premier Alison Redford who maintains that "Albertans have asked us to do this" and added "Won't somebody please think of the children!" 

To make matters worse the mother who during the incident had become distraught called her husband who was already at the celebration only minutes away, but when he arrived police seized his vehicle and took his licence after he had blown a 0.05 on a roadside device. Pleas to the officers that he had only had one drink and had finished it less that 5 minutes previous to blowing fell upon deaf ears as he watched his work vehicle being towed away.

When asked for comment the Son said "WTF, is this really Alberta?"

----------------------------

Think such a scenario is impossible? Think again.

Banning smoking in cars + Raising the legal drinking age to 19  = what you read above becoming a real possibility.  As for Bill 26, we need not look beyond our neighbours in BC to see what kind of problems we can expect to see soon here in Alberta.

Is this really the Alberta we want?  It is time for a change.




Monday update: Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Jonathan DenisTweeted:

"No changes to Alberta's drinking age. http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/01/15/top-tories-cool-to-increasing-albertas-drinking-age-to-19 #ableg"

Good, but I have this nagging feeling that this was a trial balloon and that raising the drinking age was indeed on Redford's radar.

It's Friday, time for another illegal Alberta PC donation.

Another day another revelation of Progressive Conservatives accepting illegal donations:

"The Medicine Hat Catholic School Board says it did improperly buy tickets to Premier Alison Redford’s leader’s dinner -  and has likely been breaking provincial laws against making donations to political parties for the last seven years."

7 years! ( the provision making it illegal for schools to donate became law in 2004)

I feel sorry for my PCAA friends, it can't be easy making excuses for their support while turning a blind eye to almost daily revelations of illegal donations being accepted by the PC party.

Related:

School board officials say they have attended PC fundraisers for years for "networking"

Wildrose press release that started it all this AM.

An attempt to make it all go away: Tweet from Joey Oberhoffner:

@RAndersonMLA Unbelievable is right. As in: "Didn't happen." shar.es/W8Z #ableg

What the link in the tweet used to bring up: (Target has been edited to now go to story linked to at top which refers* to the following, now deleted?)


"The Wildrose Party’s latest blast at the Tories over improper donations appears to have fizzled.

Wildrose issued a news release Friday saying the Progressive Conservatives took illegal donations at Premier Alison Redford’s leaders dinner in Medicine Hat last fall.

It cites a report from the Medicine Hat Catholic School Board saying the board had purchased five tickets for the dinner. Under provincial election law, school divisions are “prohibited corporations” not allowed to make partisan political donations.

But Peter Grad, chairman of the Catholic board, said in an interview board members had purchased the tickets themselves and were not reimbursed by the school division.

He also said the party had not solicited the board to buy tickets to the Oct. 20 event.

The chief electoral officer is investigating 10 Tory constituency associations and a number of municipalities and organizations over alleged illegal contributions"

* "This blog initially reported the comments of Peter Grad, chairman of the Catholic board, who had  told the Herald in an interview that board members had purchased the tickets themselves and were not reimbursed by the school division. Leahy said Grad was mistaken."




From Yesterday: How the PCs are blaming the victims. 

From Tuesday: It keeps getting worse: PC's accepted $15K in illegal donations...

It keeps getting worse: PC's accepted $15K in illegal donations...

Hot on the heels of news that at least 10 Alberta Progressive Conservatives riding associations are being investigated for accepting or soliciting illegal donations comes news that the PC's accepted $15,000 in illegal donations from the University of Lethbridge. 

"The Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta collected more than $15,000 in illegal donations from the University of Lethbridge between 2004 and 2007, the Wildrose Caucus revealed today. 
According to documents obtained under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (see chart below), the PC party collected $15,075 in contributions from the U of L for Premier’s Dinners, golf tournaments, “Meet the Minister” dinners, and party policy conferences.
Under the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, political parties are prohibited from soliciting and accepting contributions from groups such as municipalities, post-secondary schools, and other public institutions."

I doubt that this is even close to being the end of it either.

After 40 years of the PC's holding majority power in Alberta this type of nonsense and entitlement thinking runs rampant through all levels of our government and bureaucracy; the only way to stop it is to replace those who after 40 years continue to believe that they are entitled to rule, make up the rules, and that they themselves are above those rules.

Alberta, it is time for a change.  Lets put an end to PC cronyism, entitlement, and systemic intimidation before it is too late.

UPDATE: The University of Lethbridge response can be found here.

Of note are the following lines:

1. In the fall 2005, the University of Lethbridge was notified of changes to the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act.

2.    As soon as the University of Lethbridge was notified of changes to the Act, University Administration, the Board of Governors and the Board Finance and Audit Committee took immediate steps to ensure the University was in compliance with the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act.

Small problem. It was unlawful for any school, including the U of Lethbridge, to donate money to political parties LONG before fall 2005 and whether they were aware or not of this fact does not change at all the truth that illegal donations that were made and were accepted by the PCAA. 


This Editorial, published before the U of Lethbridge story was known, in The Calgary Herald nails the real problem.


"We needn't qualify this by using "alleged" illegal contributions because elected officials in Alberta municipalities have publicly admitted it's been going on for years. Four decades of Progressive Conservative rule is so inculcated in Alberta that elected representatives in some small municipalities thought it was standard operating procedure for them to financially support their local MLA"

Here is something that might surprise you:

"The problem is we'll never know. Under Alberta's legislation, the results of the investigation will not be made public."

Surprise! They make the rules and conveniently enough those rules will end up shielding the PC party so that we will never know.

We need a change now.

Susan Elliot, campaign manager for Alberta PC's & Alison Redford, meet the internet.

The following is a now deleted Facebook posting made January 6th, 2012 by Susan Elliot "campaign manager 2012 for PC Alberta and Premier Alison Redford". (highlighting mine)

"Susan Elliot
is disappointed that PM Harper today appointed a Senator from Alberta, knowing full well that at least six people from two parties are actively campaigning for the job, with a vote to be held within a few months. While the list he chose from may be technically valid, it is 7 years old. It is disrespectful to urge provinces to hold a vote, and when they schedule one, to act in advance of it being held."

 Welcome to the internet Susan. It never forgets.




Speaking of disrespectful:

The richness of a PC mouthpiece calling PM Harper disrespectful while ignoring the facts that it was her party, where Alison Redford was cabinet minister and cheerfully agreed with the policy that 'postponed' the last senate election scheduled in 2010 and arbitrarily extended the terms of those elected senators by 3 years until December 2013, (The reasoning spin was that it was to save money, but the real reasons are well known.) is one thing, but deleting it from the internet in a brazen attempt to make it disappear in the name of partisan politics reeks of the arrogance that has overtaken the Alberta Progressive Conservatives and insults our intelligence.


This crap is pure political hackery. It really is time for a change in this province.


Bonus: More love from a PC supporter.

@Pjhwalsh tweeted: @PrairieStorm2 @brockwharrison @crockatteer @susan_elliott I'm not sure but I think that was the slogan for the SS 

Yes. SS


In reply to PrairieStorm2: @BrockWHarrison @Crockatteer @Pjhwalsh @susan_elliott Good on you Brock. #pcaa can run but they can't hide from the scrutiny of #wrp.

The CBC Ombudsman essentially finds police chief Blair to be a liar.

The title pretty much sums it up.

CBC Ombudsman report on Rob Ford's 911 call. (PDF)

"Resolution of such a dispute requires an impartial investigation. In view of the fact the Toronto Police Service depends on budget deliberations headed by the mayor, and in view of the fact this year’s police budget that averted layoffs was reached only in the week before this incident, I concluded CBC could not rest on Blair’s account. Not only were its sources adamant about their information, the chief was not a disinterested party."


"I did not find a violation of CBC Journalistic Standards"

Call me crazy but taking the word of an anonymous source(s), who may or may not have heard ANYTHING (because CBC refuses to tell us who they are) over the Chief of Police for the City of Toronto who we know has heard the tapes and has publicly said so, does not sound like high journalistic standards to me.


BC Blue has an update here: Police spokesperson Mark Pugash: “Chief Blair listened to the calls, the CBC did not. Chief Blair’s account is accurate and truthful, he stands by what he said, and Mr. LaPointe’s suggestion that the ongoing budget process makes the chief  ‘not a disinterested party’ is completely wrong” Link.


The Toronto Sun has the story here.


late update: OPP commissioner listens to tapes, confirms Blair's account and further makes the CBC look incompetent for standing by the obviously wrong story.   


If there was ever any doubt the CBC had its own agenda, this should remove those doubts.

Merry Christmas,

I would like to wish a Merry Christmas to everyone who has stopped by the blog or has followed me on Twitter over the past year. May 2012 be your best year yet!

I know I have posted the following video before, but you can't go wrong with a Canadian classic.

From Canada's own NFB: The Great Toy Robbery.

Nanny Redford. Be afraid, be very afraid.

Do you live in Alberta an call yourself a conservative?  If so, please read the following article from Rick Bell in the Calgary Sun paying particular attention to Premier Alison Redford's own words.

Excerpts: (highlighting mine)

“We know some of the choices people make with respect to tobacco and with respect to alcohol certainly are consumption choices. They also have an impact on quality of life.”

Redford talks about how increasing taxes on alcohol and tobacco can be “a public policy tool.”
She says if the province is thinking about health and wellness as more than just putting more beds in hospitals “one of the other things we can say is what are some of the choices we can make in this society that will actually ask people to consider again some of the choices they’re making in their life.”

“Albertans are really sensible. They want to be healthy, they want to be safe and they want government to take some leadership and say: ‘You know what, we’re going to make some choices and these choices are going to be conducive to building a safer and a healthier community...

“I’ve heard Albertans say: ‘We want to have more opportunity to take responsibility for our health. We want you to emphasize wellness. We want to know if we’re a healthy person we’re not going to get penalized in the health care system.’ (BTW: How the hell does bigger gov't give someone the opportunity to take responsibility for their own health, or their 'own' anything for that matter? Total nonsense.)

Pure big government knows what is best for yo, nanny state nonsense that we have heard many times before whenever the government makes a grab for your wallet under the false pretense of helping you. It is the exact same argument that the federal Liberals used when they were trying to impose a carbon tax; it was for our own good and we should smile and thank them for the privilege of paying. Thankfully Canadians saw through the Liberals BS on their carbon tax and my hope is that Albertans will also see through Redford's very liberal like plans for another tax grab even if it is supposedly being done "for our own good".


Today it is smokes and booze but reading Redford's comments it is clear that she will not stop there. It is pretty much a given that all fees/licences/vehicle registration etc WILL be going up under the PC's but given Redford's concern for our money err I mean our health, you can expect that soon it will be taxes on sugary drinks, 'fast' or any high fat food, salt, coffee and on and on, because like all liberals Redford will not stop taxing you or stop telling you what to do because she believes that she knows how you should live your  life better than you do yourself. They can't help themselves.

When a so called conservative premier is talking like this, it really is time for a change because there is nothing at all conservative about Redford or her nanny state ideas.

The worm has turned on media obsession with the Irwin Cotler story

Reprinted from David Akin's blog, a comment from our friend Gabby in QC that totally destroys the MSM narrative on the Cotler story with examples of the media doing the exact same thing.

-------------

Let me begin by saying: my gut feeling is that Mr. Cotler is beginning to mount a campaign for the leadership of the Liberal party.

Now … when I first heard about this story, my reaction was ugh! Why is my party engaging in such dirty tricks? I jumped to that conclusion because I read / heard that people in the Mount Royal riding had received calls actually telling them Mr. Cotler WAS retiring and that there WAS an imminent by-election.
However, in the real call (from the video Mr. Akin posted) I notice the caller says: “Some people are suggesting that the current MP may retire … if you would consider supporting the Conservative party if there’s a by-election.”

• Mr. Cotler’s name is NOT mentioned, so he is not being personally targeted. Given some people’s lack of interest in politics, they may not even know who their MP is.
• “the current MP MAY retire” is not the same as “the current MP IS retiring.”
• “IF you would consider supporting” and “IF there’s a by-election” are hypotheticals, not statements of fact.
So, sorry to say, the reports about the calls were inaccurate. If there have been untruths, it is the way in which some media have portrayed the calls.

Furthermore, the media often engages in rumours, using unnamed sources to lend credence to their articles. In November 2010, Chantal Hebert, Jane Taber, and John Ibbitson all wrote columns about the imminent departure of Peter Mackay to go to a Bay St. law firm. Did Peter Mackay raise that as a question of privilege? No.

In 2008, Mia Rabson “discovered” Vic Toews was about to be appointed to a Court of Queen’s Bench judgeship. Did Vic Toews raise that rumour as a question of privilege in the House? No.
And who can forget the infamous “wafergate” accusations? Did the PM ask the House to look into it? No.
Some may argue that those rumours were not started by a political party so the Cotler issue is not the same.
BUT Mr. Cotler’s main argument is that his job as an MP was hindered by those rumours. Regardless of the source, the rumour was the aggravating factor supposedly hindering his work. Would Mr. Cotler have felt less aggrieved if the calls had been placed by the NDP? Would his work as an MP have suffered less or not at all?

Finally, Andrew Cohen in a column entitled “The smearing of Irwin Cotler”
wrote:
“It is true that Cotler has had doubts about remaining in Parliament, which isn’t unusual for a politician of his age, experience and interests, who now finds himself a backbencher. Even before the Liberals became the third party, Michael Ignatieff had to persuade him to run again this year.”

SO, the rumour that Mr. Cotler was considering leaving politics did not necessarily originate with the Conservatives. Why is Mr. Cotler now making such a big deal out of it? And why are media people like Susan Delacourt, Jennifer Ditchburn, Greg Weston, Evan Solomon, and even the usually fair Bruce Anderson trying to keep this issue alive?

--------

After a solid week of stories from most of the MSM, with the Globe and Mail in particular who seem to have a sick obsession with continuing this non story, come some relevant facts that the media has chosen to ignore.

Their own actions.

WTG Gabby, but don't be surprised if you find yourself named in a letter from Bob Rae to Elections Canada.

Link to John Ibbitson story on Peter MacKay leaving that was published AFTER MacKay himself had said he was not leaving.

And this from the CBC on Vic Toews, who also said he wasn't leaving but yet CBC published the 'reprehensible' rumour anyways and may have violated Toews 'privilege' as an MP, at least according to what the Globe and CBC have been repeatedly saying in their numerous Cotler stories.

Lies the Alberta Government told me.

Lies the Alberta Government told me.

Have you read or heard something like this from a PC Minister, MLA or PCAA hack recently in defence of the very flawed Bill 26:

We are not lowering the limit to 0.05, this is current law, the new law only changes penalties.

It may make for a nice sound bite but the reality is that every one of these statements are outright lies! There is no place at all in existing (before Bill 26) Alberta law where this mythical 0.05 blood alcohol concentration is actually written. It simply does not exist in any of our laws.

Alberta law as it existed before yesterday: Section 89 of the Alberta Traffic Safety Act reads:
(1) If a peace officer reasonably suspects that the driver of a motor vehicle has consumed alcohol or otherwise introduced into the driver’s body any alcohol, drug or other substance in such a quantity so as to affect the driver’s physical or mental ability, the peace officer may require the driver to surrender the driver’s operator’s licence to the peace officer.

0.05 is not there. It never was there. The reality is that the Redford government is in fact setting the limit and writing 0.05 into the law, and no matter how many times that they claim that they are not changing anything, the facts say otherwise. It would be nice if they would at least drop the lies and admit that they are indeed changing the law, but that would get in the way of their attempts to spin the public and admit that they are lying or that they do not know what our exiting laws say. Either way it does not give me much confidence in these people who claim to represent Albertans.


More examples:
Solicitor General and Minister of Public Security Jonathan Denis:  "We are not changing the blood alcohol limits. There already is a .05 legislation if you refer to Section 89 of the Traffic Safety Act"

Justice Minister Verlyn Olson: “This is not being pushed through for political reasons,” Olson said. “We have had a .05 guideline for signs of impairment in Alberta for a long time. That hasn’t changed.

Albertans don't like being lied to.


A quick update: For those that claim blowing a 0.05 on a roadside device is an automatic suspension should really read Section 89 again in particular the following:
5(a) at a place designated by the peace officer, undergoes a test the purpose of which is to show the proportion of alcohol in the driver’s blood, and the result of that test indicates that the proportion of alcohol in the driver’s blood does not exceed 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 milliliters of blood... the peace officer shall forthwith return the operator’s licence, if any, to the driver and the disqualification from driving is terminated.


In other words if you challenge the roadside finding of 0.05 on a breathalyzer and blow less than 0.08 you get your drivers licence back immediately. Further proving that any statements about current law being 0.05 is nothing more that a lie designed to hide what the government is actually doing.

Elizabeth May: Canadian MP and delegate of the Government of Papua New Guinea???

Call me crazy but I am having a real hard time with a sitting Member of Parliament from Canada being named as an official government delegate to ANOTHER country, never mind the fact that this is happening while our Canadian House of Commons is currently sitting.

If there is not some kind of rule against this:

Tweet from Green Party MP Elizabeth May.
Amazing. My request to Papua New Guinea came through. I have full credentials as a government delegate - fm PNG. Strong negotiators 4 Kyoto.

there should be!

Where do her loyalties lie? If she can work for a foreign government on this...

More "Business as usual" in Alberta.

On Monday the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers or CAPP were found to be in "full compliance with the requirements of the Lobbyists Act" by Alberta's Ethics Commissioner, but on Tuesday that finding has been put into question.( A PDF of that report can be found here)

Internal government documents obtained by CBC appear to contradict some of the evidence upon which Alberta’s lobbyist registrar dismissed allegations of illegal lobbying against the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

 Under the act, lobbying is distinguished from collaboration by which organization initiates the communications. If an outside group initiates talks with the government that is lobbying. In the case involving CAPP, Odsen found that it was the government that initiated talks with CAPP. But documents obtained by CBC, and statements made by the government itself to CBC, directly contract Odsen’s findings.

Sadly this is business as usual in Alberta.

Where the PC government would rather work behind closed doors with industry to develop communications strategies and write press releases and would rather lie to Albertans then tell the truth about their own legislation.  

When this kind of crap becomes an almost a daily occurrence, it really is time for a change.

Friends of the CBC mocks US culture by using well known Canadian porn promoter in its ad.

Friends of the CBC have put out an ad mocking US culture and television by showing what may happen if the CBC were to be taken off the taxpayer funded dole. The ad (see below) titled CBC's new owner gives the news some action shows "new owner" Lance Fury's, an American former pro wrestler, plans for the new CBC; hot babes and lots of 'action' with not so subtle shots at the conservatives with a picture of PM Harper visible in some background shots.



The ad intentionally mocks the culture, or what many on the left believe is the culture, of our neighbors to the south and their television programming. Scantly clad women and lots of action is what the Friends of CBC claim will become of the CBC if it were to be privatized.

And how do the 'Friends' mock the culture of our American neighbours? By using a known Canadian pornography photographer and promoter Uncle D, known as "the Canadian Ass Man" in their ad. (because our culture is so much superior to that of the US)

 Uncle D as seen in the Friends Ad. Note the unique tattoos.

Uncle D as seen on CBC's Dragons Den, so it is not as if this guy was totally unknown to the CBC or its so called friends, where he was openly promoting his porn work and asking the Dragons for some cash to help his business. Some more info on Uncle D can be found here.


Financing the CBC............... 1.3 Billion taxpayer dollars a year.
Helping the Assman.............. 250K (as asked of the Dragons)
Mocking US culture by using a Canadian porn promoter... Priceless.

Alberta's new "impaired" driving legislation.

More bad law written by a bored government trying to pander for votes.

From the St Albert Gazette: The government also plans new suspensions for drivers caught with an alcohol limit between 0.05 and 0.08. Drivers caught within that range the first time would face a three-day suspension and three-day vehicle seizure, rising to a 15-day suspension and seven-day seizure on the second offence and 30-day suspension and seven-day seizure on a third offence.

There are plenty of reasons why this is bad law, and I could write pages as to why, but just for the fact alone that one is tried and convicted at the side of the road with NO chance of an effective appeal makes this legislation a farce. While I realize that arguing against drunk driving law is like arguing against kittens, I would hope that most Albertans can see that this legislation for what it is. Written for optics and pandering.


From the comments: "The argument seems to be that not enough drivers are being caught and convicted, therefore the limit must be lowered."


Updated with link to newer post on Bill 26.

The Alberta Redux Act of 2011.

The Redford government announced today that in an effort to be more efficient that they would be putting forward only one bill in the second part of the fall sitting of the Alberta Legislature. The legislation entitled "The Alberta Redux Act" would effectively erase the past five years of PC government from the memories of Albertans and wipe out any legislation passed during this period.

"It will be much more efficient and save us a lot of time," said Alberta's Minister of Miscommunication, "instead of putting forward numerous bills to fix our flawed legislation, we will just pretend as if the past 5 years never happened and start from scratch." "It is both efficient and transparent" quickly adding, "and change too; must not forget to use the word change a lot."

The second part of the once cancelled fall session begins today.

Jennifer Ditchburn and I agree on something.

Jennifer Ditchburn and I agree on something. Too bad that her own history reveals her to be a hypocrite on the subject.

There was plenty of discussion yesterday about a blog entry the Citizen's Glen McGregor wrote about former PMO d-comm Dimitri Soudas showing up at an event with current MP Eve Adams, and whether or not gossip such as that should be considered news. To McGregor's credit he did a follow up today talking about the controversy which can be found here opening up the discussion further. I myself do not think that such nonsense is worth writing about as does not even come close to what I would consider 'news' but something I read in his follow up struck me as interesting.

"And  on Evan Solomon’s Power and Politics on CBC News Network, an entire panel segment was devoted to a talking about whether it was appropriate to talk about it. By a three to one decision — four to one if you include Solomon — the pundits ruled that it was not. Canadian Press reporter Jennifer Ditchburn denounced the reporting most emphatically while only NDP strategist Ian Capstick defended it. Ditchburn compared the issue to the outing a gay MP, which I think is an unfair comparison, as neither Soudas nor Adams appear be hiding their relationship." 

Here is the part that piqued my attention: "Jennifer Ditchburn denounced the reporting most emphatically..."  Yes she did do so most emphatically, in fact here is what she had to say on the subject. Ditchburn: " I got a lot to say about it. This is not a story. Someones personal life, their relationships with someone; I don't believe is a story, a national news story, first of all." In response to Capstick she also said the following: "When does gossip become news, that is what I want to know?"

While I do agree with Ditchburn that gossip should not be news, I have to wonder how she could sit there and defend that position after she wrote the following back in 2010.

Guergis had a history in the clubs with hometown playboy: acquaintance.

Ottawa- Helena Guergis may have nurtured the image of a straightlaced cabinet minister on Parliament Hill, but people who knew her in younger days paint a picture of a regular club-goer often seen on the arm of a hometown playboy.

 A story based on Guergis's personal life, her relationships with others, gossip & allegations not even from 2010 but from 10 years earlier, combined with the now proven false, allegations surrounding her and her husband at the time of writing.


So what was it that you were saying about relationships and gossip not being news Jennifer?


Related: Another post I wrote on Ditchburn can be found here.

How long before we see these pop up all across Alberta?

Ed Stelmach: Miss me yet?