CanPol - Do we have our election issue?

[embalmer42]

Not to bring a thread back from a near-death experience, but I was wondering how things were shaping up now that a week or two has passed:

So the budget has come down and the Liberals have indicated they will support it. The Conservatives have compromised on Afghanistan to the point it seems the Liberals will support it. Is it just my imagination or have the election war drums that were supposedly beating so hard a few weeks ago suddenly become quiet?

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes, I don't think anyone really wants an election. The numbers don't support a breakthrough except out west.

The conservatives have a much stronger minority now, then at dissolution, and it will probably continue to strengthen through the byelections.

It would be interesting to be only the second full term minority government, behind only Mackenzie King who pulled it off after the King/Byng affair.

The only other two minority governments which have lasted longer are both of Pearson's. So Harper is number 4 now.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by embalmer42
Is it just my imagination or have the election war drums that were supposedly beating so hard a few weeks ago suddenly become quiet?

Harper's Senate deadline is Friday. I haven't heard a resolution to this issue yet.

[embalmer42]

Originally posted by Wezil


Harper's Senate deadline is Friday. I haven't heard a resolution to this issue yet.

I believe the Senate passed the bill on Wednesday.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by embalmer42


I believe the Senate passed the bill on Wednesday.

So we should at least make it past the upcoming bi-elections. Too damn cold to be voting.

[Wezil]

I guess someone should post this...

OTTAWA - The widow of a former MP says her dying husband told her the Conservatives tried to bribe him with a lucrative insurance policy in exchange for his support in a historic 2005 House of Commons vote.

And there's a tape circulating that suggests then-opposition leader Stephen Harper was not only aware of a financial offer to Chuck Cadman but gave it his blessing.

But Harper vehemently denies any financial inducement had been made - and says the only overture to Cadman was a political offer to let him run as a Conservative in the imminent election.

The RCMP has been asked to investigate, and confirmed late Thursday that it is examining a claim from the Liberal party that the incident violates the Criminal Code's Section 119 provisions on bribery and corruption.

The alleged offer was made two months before Cadman died of cancer in 2005, and two days before a dramatic vote in which the fate of the Liberal government rested entirely on his shoulders.

Harper denied that party agents offered inducements to Cadman before a vote that could have toppled Paul Martin's Liberals at the height of the sponsorship scandal.


But Dona Cadman, who is running for the Conservatives in B.C., stuck to her guns in an interview Thursday.

The accusation comes at a pivotal point for Harper and the Conservatives, who face a series of confidence votes over the next several weeks beginning with the first vote Thursday on the budget.

Within hours of the story breaking, political calculators were re-calibrated across Ottawa to factor in what could be the biggest scandal the Conservatives have faced since they won power two years ago.

The incident is alleged to have happened during a highly charged period in federal politics. Martin's government was hanging by a thread and facing a confidence vote. Belinda Stronach had just defected from Harper's Conservatives to join the Liberals.

Cadman, an Independent MP, would cast the vote that would decide the fate of the government. The Conservatives now acknowledge Cadman was visited by two of the most influential people in the party - current campaign boss Doug Finley and Harper mentor Tom Flanagan - before the dramatic vote on May 19, 2005.

But they said the only offer they made was to allow Cadman to run for the party in an uncontested nomination.

The prime minister dismissed the allegation. He also noted that Cadman himself had publicly said he never received such an offer.

"This story was raised with me two-and-a-half years ago. I looked into it. There is absolutely no truth in it," Harper said Thursday.

"Chuck Cadman himself - on national television, the day of that historic vote - also indicated this story is not true. I wish everybody would accept his word."

However, the publisher of a soon-to-be-released book on Cadman's life was offering tapes of Harper - at $500 a copy - discussing a financial offer three years ago.

Harper visited Dona Cadman soon after her husband's death to offer condolences. Upon emerging from the house, Harper was questioned by a local journalist working on Cadman's biography.

On the tape, Harper is heard confirming that party representatives made a financial appeal to Cadman and that he was aware of their plans.

Harper, leader of the Opposition at the time, said he wasn't enthusiastic about their chances of success and urged them to proceed with caution.

"The offer to Chuck was that it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election," Harper says.

Harper said of the people who made the offer: "They were legitimately representing the party. ... I said 'Don't press him, I mean, you have this theory that it's, you know, financial insecurity, and you know, just, you know, if that's what you're saying make that case,' but I said, 'Don't press it'."

Dona Cadman says her own anger over the alleged inducement has subsided with time, and that she was never quite as furious about it as her husband.

And she says she has no regrets about going public - even if it puts her in an uncomfortable position.

The Conservatives were deluged with questions Thursday about whether they offered Cadman additional life insurance several weeks before his death. It almost certain that no company would offer Cadman a traditional policy given the advanced stage of his cancer.

The Liberals pummelled the government with accusations about the incident, using every opportunity of the Commons question period to raise the issue.

On at least two occasions Liberal MPs read the House of Commons standing orders that describe a financial inducement to sway an MP's vote as a "high crime."

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said the alleged attempt was immoral, unethical and illegal.

"Chuck Cadman was a man of great integrity, but now we learn that the Conservative party tried to buy him and that the prime minister was aware of it," Dion said.

"What was the prime minister thinking?"

Cadman was a popular MP who had been a guitarist in a rock band and an electrician before entering politics as an advocate for victims' rights following the murder of his son.

He entered the Commons as a Reform MP in 1997. Even after he lost the nomination for his B.C. riding and was diagnosed with cancer, Cadman ran as an Independent MP and crushed the competition in 2004.

New Democrat Pat Martin put a motion before the Commons ethics committee calling for an investigation of the Cadman allegations.

Martin, vice-chairman of the committee, called for "a study to investigate allegations of wrongdoing pertaining to reports that representatives of the Conservative party offered inducements and rewards to MP Chuck Cadman in order to influence his vote on the budget of May 2005."

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008/02/28/4882626-cp.html

Stay tuned to see if this gets any more traction.

[Ben Kenobi]

His widow's word is about as sturdy as toilet paper.

She pushed for Penny Priddy to take Cadman's seat, just to screw the conservative candidate over, so she could run in the next election as a conservative and keep the seat.

She lost to Priddy anyways, so justice was served.

She's about as much a friend of the Conservatives as Layton, except Layton isn't a backstabber.

Why didn't she reveal this years ago? Why now?

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
His widow's word is about as sturdy as toilet paper.

She pushed for Penny Priddy to take Cadman's seat, just to screw the conservative candidate over, so she could run in the next election as a conservative and keep the seat.

She lost to Priddy anyways, so justice was served.

She's about as much a friend of the Conservatives as Layton, except Layton isn't a backstabber.

Why didn't she reveal this years ago? Why now?

And the daughter who has confirmed the story?

[Wezil]

And the radio interview from Cadman himself...

OTTAWA - The voice of a cancer-stricken MP who died months after a historic confidence vote came back to haunt the Conservatives on Friday after a three-year-old radio interview surfaced in which Chuck Cadman says party officials made him financial overtures.

In a June 12, 2005, interview on Vancouver radio station CKNW, Cadman said the Tories did, in fact, make him financial offers days before the crucial vote.

"There was certainly some, you know, some offers made and some things along those lines about not opposing me and helping out with the finances of the campaign and that sort of thing. But, again, you know, that's all part of the deal that goes on. It's what happens, especially in a minority situation," Cadman says.

The interview lent credence to claims from Cadman's family that the terminally ill Independent MP - on whose shoulders rested the fate of Paul Martin's Liberal government - told them Tory officials allegedly offered him a $1-million life insurance policy in exchange for his support.

Cadman's widow, Dona - a Conservative candidate - said her husband was livid at the alleged offer, which she said she considered a bribe.

Cadman's daughter, Jodi, also said her late father made a deathbed admission about the alleged $1-million life insurance policy offer and other enticements.


And on Friday afternoon, Holland Miller, Cadman's son-in-law, told CKNW the late MP told him about the alleged Conservative life insurance offer when he returned to British Columbia after the vote.

At the centre of the swirling controversy is a tape released Thursday suggesting then-Opposition leader Stephen Harper not only knew two party officials allegedly made an "offer" to Cadman, but also gave it his blessing.

Author Tom Zytaruk taped an interview with Harper in September 2005 for his soon-to-be-released biography of Cadman. On the scratchy 2:37 recording, Harper confirms party officials made a financial appeal to Cadman.

"The offer to Chuck was that it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election," Harper says.

Harper said while he wasn't optimistic about their chances of persuading Cadman - a former Tory MP who had left the party to sit as an Independent MP - to vote with the Conservatives to bring down Martin's government, he urged two people "legitimately representing the party" to tread cautiously.

"I said 'Don't press him, I mean, you have this theory that it's, you know, financial insecurity, and you know, just, you know, if that's what you're saying make that case,' but I said, 'Don't press it'."

Not clear is what exactly the Conservative insiders offered Cadman. The Tories insist that Doug Finley and Harper mentor Tom Flanagan only offered to take Cadman back into the party fold.

Asked what financial considerations Harper was talking about on the tape, and what case did he tell the party emissaries to make, the prime minister's communications director ducked the questions.

In an e-mail to The Canadian Press, Sandra Buckler said the tape - which the publisher of the book was selling for $500 a copy - is an excerpt of a longer interview between the prime minister and Zytaruk.

"We are deeply concerned that an edited excerpt of a taped conversation between Mr. Harper and the book's author is being bootlegged for five hundred bucks a pop by the author. We call on the author to provide Canadians with a complete, unedited audio copy of the author's conversation - from start to finish - with Mr. Harper."

Buckler did not reply to a second e-mail asking her to respond to the two original questions.

That left Tory MP James Moore to fend off questions from opposition MPs and reporters outside the House of Commons. He dodged questions about whether the offer was indeed for a life insurance policy or for the Conservative nomination in the B.C. riding of Surrey North.

"I haven't spoken to Dona or Jodi Cadman. But (what) I do know is that neither of them were in the meeting," he said outside the Commons.

"Chuck Cadman was in the meeting and Mr. Finley and Mr. Flanagan were in the meeting. All three of them said that no offer was made. Chuck Cadman was very clear about that. And he said that in two nationally televised interviews. And I think it's very clear."

A reporter chased Moore as he retreated to the Commons, repeatedly asking him if the offer was for the nomination or life insurance. He didn't answer.

Asked how the Conservatives could have allegedly obtained life insurance for Cadman - who died of cancer two months later - Liberal MP Mark Holland speculated the party could have paid the cost of the policy.

But insurance experts - including one from Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services, a Quebec firm that insures MPs - say it's next to impossible to find a life insurer to provide a $1-million policy for a terminally ill person.

For the second straight day, opposition parties hammered the Conservatives in the Commons.

Outside the Commons, Liberal MP Garth Turner suggested time is running out for the Tories to come up with a credible explanation for what exactly was offered to Cadman.

"The questions have not gone away, and each day more evidence has come forward that this is a serious issue. So, unless the government refutes that very quickly, or comes out with a statement of clarification, then I think we ought to be thinking about bringing these guys down," he said.

Later Friday, Liberal party officials said talk of an election over the issue is "premature."

Turner's remarks came on the first of seven opposition days between now and March 26, triggering speculation the government could face one or more confidence motions on which it could fall.

The Liberals decided Friday not to put forth a confidence motion. But the NDP says it's highly likely they'll use their opposition day next Friday - March 7 - on a confidence matter.

If a no-confidence motion passes, Harper would have no choice but to go to Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean and ask her to dissolve Parliament.

Liberal MPs including Turner - publicly hawkish for an election - and Holland said the party would mull over its options before deciding whether to pull the plug on the Conservative government.

Meanwhile, Liberal MP Paul Szabo - chair of the Commons ethics committee probing the Brian Mulroney-Karlheinz Schreiber affair - said all three opposition parties put forward motions for the committee to investigate what he called the "Chuck Cadman bribery scandal."

Szabo said the committee will deal with those motions on Tuesday.

The RCMP also reiterated Friday they are examining a Liberal party claim that the incident violates Criminal Code provisions on bribery and corruption.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008/02/29/4884870-cp.html

Oh my. The stench is starting to rise.

[notyoueither]

"There was certainly some, you know, some offers made and some things along those lines about not opposing me and helping out with the finances of the campaign and that sort of thing. But, again, you know, that's all part of the deal that goes on. It's what happens, especially in a minority situation,"

Oh my! The Tories offered to pay for campaign expenses of a possible Tory nominee.

Asked how the Conservatives could have allegedly obtained life insurance for Cadman - who died of cancer two months later - Liberal MP Mark Holland speculated the party could have paid the cost of the policy.

But insurance experts - including one from Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services, a Quebec firm that insures MPs - say it's next to impossible to find a life insurer to provide a $1-million policy for a terminally ill person.

One would think.

Yes something stinks.

[Ben Kenobi]

Something stinks here but it ain't the Cons.

Let me get it straight.

The Conservatives trying to break the deadlock offer Cadman a million bucks.

He dies, and gets life insurance of that exact amount.

Now Dona Cadman chooses this time now to reveal that the Conservatives tried to pay him off, and that she was the primary recipient of that money.

Why would she backstab the people responsible for ensuring that she got a million bucks? That makes no sense to me.

My question is this.

We already know Mr. Martin was willing to do anything and everything to keep his minority.

We all know Cadman voted to side with him so that he survived the first confidence motion.

Why is it now that this story is coming to light? The Liberals are in trouble. They offered Dona Cadman to finger the Conservatives for giving her the money, rather then the true source.

It makes perfect sense. The timing, is spot on, that Dona Cadman would stab the Conservatives in the back again, not because they were the ones who paid Cadman off, but because they were not the ones responsible.

I think the Liberals successfully bribed Cadman and paid his wife off. That is the only solution that makes sense to me.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by notyoueither

Oh my! The Tories offered to pay for campaign expenses of a possible Tory nominee.

Is that as far as it went? We have at least three people saying it went a whole lot further than that.

One would think.

Yes something stinks.

Agreed, this is improbable. What form was the "insurance" to take? Was it an official policy from an underwriter or just a lot of cash for Cadman when he dies? The former is unlikely for obvious reasons, the latter is possible.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Something stinks here but it ain't the Cons.

Let me get it straight.

The Conservatives trying to break the deadlock offer Cadman a million bucks.

He dies, and gets life insurance of that exact amount.

You are still not straight. He refused the offer as he found it distasteful.

Now Dona Cadman chooses this time now to reveal that the Conservatives tried to pay him off, and that she was the primary recipient of that money.

No, he refused the offer.

Why would she backstab the people responsible for ensuring that she got a million bucks? That makes no sense to me.

He refused the offer.

My question is this.

We already know Mr. Martin was willing to do anything and everything to keep his minority.

There is a flip side to that coin Ben. The Conservatives at that point were "willing to do anything" to bring Martin down.

We all know Cadman voted to side with him so that he survived the first confidence motion.

If he was as offended by the Conservative bribe as the other sources claim then this is not surprising.

Why is it now that this story is coming to light? The Liberals are in trouble. They offered Dona Cadman to finger the Conservatives for giving her the money, rather then the true source.

Tin foil hat time. You need some evidence to back this up.

It makes perfect sense. The timing, is spot on, that Dona Cadman would stab the Conservatives in the back again, not because they were the ones who paid Cadman off, but because they were not the ones responsible.

Double layer of tin foil.

I think the Liberals successfully bribed Cadman and paid his wife off. That is the only solution that makes sense to me.

Wow, that is completely unsubstantiated.


On the one side we have a Conservative PM that has difficulty with ethics and the truth along with a couple party bagmen and on the other a widow of the principal (also a Conservative), a daughter, a son-in-law, a radio interview, and a mysterious tape allegedly of Mr. Harper that we haven't heard.

Yes, something definitely smells.

[Ben Kenobi]

I asked two questions, neither of which I think are accounted by the theory that the Conservatives tried to bribe Cadman.

1. Why would Dona Cadman, if the Conservatives were the ones who paid out the insurance turn around now and accuse them of bribing Cadman? They just gave her a million bucks.

2. Why now? Wouldn't it have made more sense to squeal then if you wanted to embarrass the conservatives?

3. Why would the Conservatives after being flatly told no, seeing Cadman vote against them give Cadman a million dollar insurance policy anyways?

These are the only reasons why I believe the Liberals were the ones who tried to bribe Cadman and did so successfully (hence the insurance). He was bought and paid for by the Liberals, and Cadman is their bagman right now.

I would need to see more evidence then has been presented to believe that it's the conservatives who are responsible, just because the whole scenario makes no sense to me.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I asked two questions, neither of which I think are accounted by the theory that the Conservatives tried to bribe Cadman.

1. Why would Dona Cadman, if the Conservatives were the ones who paid out the insurance turn around now and accuse them of bribing Cadman? They just gave her a million bucks.

*sigh* They did not pay out or give her a million bucks. For the 3rd or 4th time now - He refused the bribe.

2. Why now? Wouldn't it have made more sense to squeal then if you wanted to embarrass the conservatives?

Good question. The book launch on the subject just happened and it would appear the press pack was put onto the trail as a result of the contents of this book. It is quite concievable the widow was not planning on speaking out but when faced with the choice of retelling the distasteful story or lying to protect the party she chose the former.

3. Why would the Conservatives after being flatly told no, seeing Cadman vote against them give Cadman a million dollar insurance policy anyways?

Do I have to take your Lord's name in vain?! HE DIDN'T TAKE THE GODDAMN MONEY!!

These are the only reasons why I believe the Liberals were the ones who tried to bribe Cadman and did so successfully (hence the insurance). He was bought and paid for by the Liberals, and Cadman is their bagman right now.

Why are you making facts up? He wasn't bought and paid by anyone.

I would need to see more evidence then has been presented to believe that it's the conservatives who are responsible, just because the whole scenario makes no sense to me.

Quite frankly I don't think the truth of the matter could ever be proven beyond a reasonable doubt but that isn't all that matters in politics. Perception is important and this looks bad. It looks even worse when senior Conservatives scurry away from the questions (please read the articles I posted). The whole scenario makes no sense to you b/c you don't seem to understand what (allegedly) happened.

In the end it will come down to a question of credibility and I see no motive for widow, daughter, son-in-law, or TV station (the book author obviously has motive) to lie and I do see motive from the Conservative side. Combined with their track record I don't see this as a stretch.