# WE charity debacle. Please post your comments if you must on this, here.



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

I personally don't want to waste my time or energy on this topic but I know some will and will sidetrack other threads to do so if given a chance.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Not much to talk about, yet another conflict of interest scandal.
Looks like it's another pretty clear case that Trudeau is really unable to understand the basics of ethics.

I can't wait till we get rid of this guy, the damage he's doing to this country is insane.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

__





Hire Stephen Harper to Speak at Events - Professional Speaker Booking Agency.


Stephen Harper booking agent for speaking engagements. Book Stephen Harper to speak about politics-government at corporate events, businesses, tradeshows or conferences, commencement speeches, motivational speaking, as well as other keynote speaker functions.




www.celebritytalent.net


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)




----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

sags said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Do you see there is a difference between someone who speaks AFTER they are out of office vs. the current PM awarding a SOLE SOURCE contract to the charity that his wife and mother get paid to speak with. The latter is a conflict of interests.

Sophie and Margeret were paid almost a half million to speak for WE, then WE org was given the contract as a sole source to administer the Youth Grant. No competition for the contract and the amounts are over the allowable amount for a single contract. There were areas which they broke the rules, awarding a contract as sole source that is over the allowable amounts, and even worst, awarding the contract to those who pay your wife and mother. 

Stephen Harper getting paid to speak is not the problem. Many people politicians get paid to speak, but not while they are in office.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Plugging Along said:


> Stephen Harper getting paid to speak is not the problem. Many people politicians get paid to speak, but not while they are in office.



Yeah, I just don't see the connection of this incident with Trudeau compared to a former politician. Really, really grasping at straws. 

SAGS, you have to come up with something better than that if you're going to defend your hero.

ltr


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

This is clearly a conspiracy and lies made up by the opposition. Why didn't Scheer wear a mask? And is Peter McKay crying from his helicopter ride? Wake up.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Neither Margaret, Sophie or any anyone the Conservatives are complaining about are in government either.

They have as much influence over the government as Harper has over the Conservative Party.

One difference is that Harper charges a lot more for his speeches, and he isn't doing them to raise money for charity.

Margaret Trudeau collected $250,000 for 28 speeches and appearances to raise money for the charity. That is basically "expense" money.

Sophie Gregoire Trudeau received $1400 way back in 2012, before Trudeau was PM. That probably didn't even cover her "expenses".

The charity was recommended by the public service because they had the infrastructure to administer the program.

All the Conservatives have managed to do is stall the implementation of the program for students who need the money and charities that need the help.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

sags said:


> Neither Margaret, Sophie or any anyone the Conservatives are complaining about are in government either.
> 
> They have as much influence over the government as Harper has over the Conservative Party.
> 
> ...


Actually, the relationship Harper has IS different than the mother and wife of the Prime Minister. meother a mother or wife are considered at ’arms length’ and can influence decision making. When evaluatiNg bids, one must be at arms length To prevent conflict of interest. This is not just political but often defined in conflict of interest policies. A mother or wife relationship would be deemed a conflict. The other problem is that this did not even go through proper due diligence of procurement which is also a problem. 

I don’t have a particular love or hate against any political party. They all do a pretty crappy job some where. I am just pointing out your lack of critical thinking.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Plugging Along said:


> Actually, the relationship Harper has IS different than the mother and wife of the Prime Minister. meother a mother or wife are considered at ’arms length’ and can influence decision making. When evaluatiNg bids, one must be at arms length To prevent conflict of interest. This is not just political but often defined in conflict of interest policies. A mother or wife relationship would be deemed a conflict. The other problem is that this did not even go through proper due diligence of procurement which is also a problem.
> 
> I don’t have a particular love or hate against any political party. They all do a pretty crappy job some where. I am just pointing out your lack of critical thinking.


I'm not against quickly awarding something, but I think there are better organizations, like the Summer Jobs Program coordinators. If they really couldn't the YMCA is current shut down, and they have experience with hundreds of student staff and volunteers across the country.

You realize that Trudeau voted against an investigation into his own behaviour?
He either doesn't understand ethics, or he simply doesn't care.

I honestly don't know which is worse, if he's actually that stupid, or that arrogant.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

My critical thinking is to judge the administration of the program by the charity, after they have completed the task.......not before they start.

The paying of speaker fees in the past is not relative to how well the charity would administer the program in the future.

Are you proposing an internal investigation of every MP to see what charity doesn't have some connection to someone in Parliament ?

Let's give it the Salvation Army.....whoops, can't do that. This Conservative MP has a sister who works for them.

Canadians aren't interested in the constant whining by Conservatives. They should go to plan B.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Trudeau and his wife are going to earn tons and tons of money after he leaves office.
What is the hurry to grab some now?
It is not as though he is unable to pay the rent.


----------



## Topo (Aug 31, 2019)

It shows bad judgement that JT and his family did not foresee how bad this would look, even assuming that it is legal. 

Cheapening their brand for a fistful of dollars. What were they thinking?


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

I never thought I would be wishing for Harper. And I voted for this specimen to get rid of Harper!


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Conservatives should get a different spokesperson on ethics than Pierre Polivere.



https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadian-mps-free-foreign-travel-620k-1.4595379


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

kcowan said:


> I never thought I would be wishing for Harper. And I voted for this specimen to get rid of Harper!


I thought Harper was great, I actually don't understand why people didn't want him in charge.

He was capable and pragmatic, but just not a warm fuzzy nice guy.

I always thought Trudeau was an arrogant idiot, but I thought the senior leadership would keep him in line, something they were apparently completely incapable of doing.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The opposition can force a confidence vote and there can be an election in the fall.

Perhaps that is the best solution. Let the people decide.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

LOL, now Bill Morneau has been dragged into this. 








Bill Morneau didn’t recuse himself from WE discussion despite daughter’s employment - National | Globalnews.ca


NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus wrote a letter to Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion on Friday asking him to investigate whether Morneau breached his duties under conflict of interest legislation.




globalnews.ca





I don't know whether to think this is a case of incredible stupidity or a case of simply not being able to SEE any issue might exist. I see the latter as possible because both Trudeau and Morneau are in cultural terms French Canadians and as such they think differently from English Canadians whether anyone wants to admit or acknowledge that ais reality.

Giving preferential treatment to friends and family is an integral part of Quebecers cultural norms. They can't actually see anything wrong with doing that. Why wouldn't you help friends and family if you can? Your cousin Pierre has a construction company and you have the ability to award a contract, who else would you give it to?

You expect there to be competing bids and the contract should go to the lowest bidder? Why? Does lowest mean best? What if they do a crap job like the Phoenix payroll system that is still an ongoing problem years later? That went to bids and look what we got. No, no, better to give a contract to cousin Pierre, who we know and trust. LOL

It's all in how you look at it don't you think. Nothing of this kind ever surprises me when it comes to French Canadians in government at any level. It's in their DNA for crying out loud. It is ridiculous to expect them to act any differently.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> Let the people decide.


People are idiots. They vote for the nicest looking and who gives them the most free money.

ltr


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> LOL, now Bill Morneau has been dragged into this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well that's exactly why Quebec gets upset when they're labelled the most corrupt province.

It really does seem like they're more ethically incompetent, which honestly is very bad.
The thing that erodes trust, is they feel this behaviour is ok, and they're doing it, in public, to the tunes of millions and billions of dollars. 

If they're doing this in front of the world, who knows what's going on behind closed doors. This is what destroys faith in government.

I don't really care if it is personal lack of ethics, or a cultural lack of ethics. We actually created laws, rules and policies for these behaviours, and they're not following them.
That's the whole point of a codified system of laws, it's so we can be clear what the appropriate and agreed public behaviours are. 

That's really the anger here, we have an agreed set of principles and they're not abiding by them. Playing the same game, but they're not following the rules. Unfortuantely I don't think they really grasp what happens if everyone abandoned the rules.


----------



## Thal81 (Sep 5, 2017)

We had an opportunity to get rid of him less than a year ago and we failed. Now there is no serious opposition so we're stuck with this clown when we need real leadership on top.

I think the only way out of this is if it comes internally from the Liberal party. Some kind of mutiny where they put so much pressure that he has to resign. If that's even possible, I suppose the PM role would fall to the second in line, which I believe is Chrystia Freeland. I would be more than happy with this scenario... but I guess I can only dream.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The speaking fees are in the past and have nothing to do with "awarding" a contract foday.

Morneau's daughter worked for free as a student and his other daughter works under a contract expiring in August.

People can have their own opinions but not their own facts.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

If the Conservatives are so inept they can't organize themselves to offer a decent alternative, they aren't ready for power.

Trudeau has the Liberals with 74% support among Canadians. He isn't going anywhere until he decides to retire.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> Trudeau has the Liberals with 74% support among Canadians.


It is really amazing that the public is so stupid to support this leader and party. Does anyone actually read the newspaper (even though the media has been paid off, enough information leaks through that the public should be in the streets) demanding a new government.

It shows that if you throw enough money around you can get elected.

ltr


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Goldilocks scenario.........the Conservatives are too far right, the NDP are too far left, and the Liberals are nicely settled in the middle.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> The Goldilocks scenario.........the Conservatives are too far right, the NDP are too far left, and the Liberals are nicely settled in the middle.



No, no they're not. They're way far left with an idiot as their leader. He simply gives away money without thinking. I just received a non-taxable $300 cheque in my bank account this week along with 6 million other seniors. That pretty much settles it. You can't imagine how little I need that $300 and what a waste it is. Why was it not taxable so it could be clawed back from the rich? He's buying votes. Do you not see this?

This is a leader that's trying to buy the next election. Why do you support him?

ltr


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> No, no they're not. They're way far left with an idiot as their leader. He simply gives away money without thinking. I just received a non-taxable $300 cheque in my bank account this week along with 6 million other seniors. That pretty much settles it. You can't imagine how little I need that $300 and what a waste it is. Why was it not taxable so it could be clawed back from the rich? He's buying votes. Do you not see this?
> 
> This is a leader that's trying to buy the next election. Why do you support him?
> 
> ltr


Because he'll tax the rich to give us more money.

Never mind there aren't many rich, and they already pay most of the taxes.









Posthaste: Canada’s top 10% of earners pay 54% of taxes — but here’s the kicker, many are just middle-class


Stuff you need to know




financialpost.com





Or that government staff are paid way more than the rest of us.
Why do 20% of the Ontario public sector workers make over $100k?
(170k are on the >$100k sunshine list)









Ontario government employs 11% of province's salaried workers: FAO


The Ontario government employs more than one in 10 salaried workers in the province, paying them $41.4 billion in salary and wages.




torontosun.com






https://www.ontario.ca/page/public-sector-salary-disclosure-2019-all-sectors-and-seconded-employees


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

sags said:


> The opposition can force a confidence vote and there can be an election in the fall.
> 
> Perhaps that is the best solution. Let the people decide.


If only it was just the people deciding and not the media picking their favourites to promote and ignore their scandals. At the same time they concentrated all their efforts on a member of the other party who was seen without a mask...front page headlines for days but we all know this latest scandal will disappear in a day or so.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

sags said:


> People can have their own opinions but not their own facts.


Take your own advice.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Thal81 said:


> I think the only way out of this is if it comes internally from the Liberal party. Some kind of mutiny where they put so much pressure that he has to resign. If that's even possible, I suppose the PM role would fall to the second in line, which I believe is Chrystia Freeland. I would be more than happy with this scenario... but I guess I can only dream.


I suspect this will be the case. Trudeau is starting to wear out his welcome and Chrystia Freeland's star is on the rise. From all appearances, she seems to work well with others including former Conservative party members during the NAFTA negotiations.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> I suspect this will be the case. Trudeau is starting to wear out his welcome and Chrystia Freeland's star is on the rise. From all appearances, she seems to work well with others including former Conservative party members during the NAFTA negotiations.


She's far more competent than Trudeau.

I think it would be better if she was in charge. That being said, I still have issues with anyone who can support the Liberal party, considering how irresponsible they've been, and that they continue to support Trudeau. 
I'd have a lot more confidence in the party if they got rid of Trudeau for his many failings.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

like_to_retire said:


> No, no they're not. They're way far left with an idiot as their leader. He simply gives away money without thinking. I just received a non-taxable $300 cheque in my bank account this week along with 6 million other seniors. That pretty much settles it. You can't imagine how little I need that $300 and what a waste it is. Why was it not taxable so it could be clawed back from the rich? He's buying votes. Do you not see this?
> 
> This is a leader that's trying to buy the next election. Why do you support him?
> 
> ltr


We received the $600 and gave it to a family member who is a single mom and can always use some extra money.

She will spend it at a store and that will support workers. They will earn wages and pay taxes and the money will flow through the economy.

That is what some people don't understand. The government is giving people money to spend. The goal is to keep the economy alive.

We wouldn't spend "more" because we have this extra bit of money, so we gave it to someone who needs it and will spend it.

I have seen lots of stories and charts about how much money the government is spending, but none of them show how much revenue is flowing back to the government because of the spending. We know from the past that any "one time" benefit given to people creates a "bump" in economic output, so there will be a very significant increase in GDP because of all the spending. Finance Minister Morneau understands "the multiplier effect" very well.

It may not show as an increase from pre-pandemic levels but it will mean the economy shrinks less than it would have without the spending.

The Conservatives either don't understand macro economics, or they are deliberately choosing to ignore the facts for political reasons.

Every time Pierre Poilievre stands up and states the government is "wasting" money by supporting Canadians, he loses more votes from the public.

No wonder they are so far behind in the polls. It is the Conservatives who need better leaders, not the Liberals.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> I have seen lots of stories and charts about how much money the government is spending, but none of them show how much revenue is flowing back to the government because of the spending. We know from the past that any "one time" benefit given to people creates a "bump" in economic output, so there will be a very significant increase in GDP because of all the spending.



Well then, if that's all it takes to increase real GDP, then the government should give away billions, even trillions more and the GDP would really soar. What a wonderful slanted view of finance socialists enjoy.

ltr


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> That's really the anger here, we have an agreed set of principles and they're not abiding by them. Playing the same game, but they're not following the rules. Unfortuantely I don't think they really grasp what happens if everyone abandoned the rules.


LOL, who agreed to the rules? I don't think you are really grasping that YOUR game and rules are not THEIR game and rules. They are playing by THEIR rules, who's rules do you play by? Answer, YOUR rules. We all do that.

What party has not had members who abused the rules? It is naive to think that politicians of any stripe will not abuse some things if they think they can get away with it. Mike Duffy was a Conservative Senator when he abused his housing allowance and created a scandal for example. You can find examples in all parties and in all eras of our history.

I have no issue with people decrying an individual for improper behaviour. What amazes me is how many people then use that to decry an entire political party as if it was confined only to that party. We have 'sinners' in every party. Always have and always will. Whether they do it out of stupidity, cultural behaviour or just plain greed and the belief they will get away with it is irrelevant.

Any scandal involving a politician is 'business as usual' as far as I'm concerned. It is no reason for me to decide to support one party over another.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> Any scandal involving a politician is 'business as usual' as far as I'm concerned. It is no reason for me to decide to support one party over another.


What's unusual is how blatant and unapologetic he is about it.
If you're going to funnel taxpayer money back to friends and families, at least.
1. Be subtle.
2. Be apologetic when caught.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> I thought Harper was great, I actually don't understand why people didn't want him in charge.
> 
> He was capable and pragmatic, but just not a warm fuzzy nice guy.
> 
> I always thought Trudeau was an arrogant idiot, but I thought the senior leadership would keep him in line, something they were apparently completely incapable of doing.


Harper is a bit like a smarter Donald Trump. He had very little regard for institutions and norms.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Harper is a bit like a smarter Donald Trump. He had very little regard for institutions and norms.


Interesting opinion.
Doesn't really mesh with reality though.
Harper was a lifelong policy guy and is well respected worldwide across political divisions.

Trump isn't a policy guy, he isn't respected pretty much anywhere, he's only a bit of charisma, Not Hilary, and presents that he cares about the stuff his supporters care about. He's really an emotional narcisist.


The most consistent complaint with Harper always seemed to be that he lacked charisma, I like Harper because he'd do a good job, not because I'd want to hang out with him.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

He didn't seem to mind weakening institutions. Conservatives are now reaping that harvest with Trudeau. Just wait until a Democratic president as shameless as Trump is elected. The wailing from conservatives will be legendary.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

How quickly some people forget. Obama was one of the most corrupt presidents in history...Democrats loved him and the Republicans were mostly silent.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^^


> Well that's exactly why Quebec gets upset when they're labelled the most corrupt province.


 ... well there's still time to seperate from the rest of Canada.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Prairie Guy said:


> How quickly some people forget. Obama was one of the most corrupt presidents in history...Democrats loved him and the* Republicans were mostly silent.*


 ... so this confirms the Dump is NOT a Republican with his 365-24/7 rants on Twitter.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Prairie Guy said:


> How quickly some people forget. Obama was one of the most corrupt presidents in history...Democrats loved him and the Republicans were mostly silent.


Absurd. Tea Party? Birtherism?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Conservatives want to call the cops on Trudeau after calling them on each other. 

They are quite the midway sideshow act with Pierre Poutine as the main performer. When do the bring out the dancing bears ?


----------



## yyz (Aug 11, 2013)

sags said:


> We received the $600 and gave it to a family member who is a single mom and can always use some extra money.
> 
> She will spend it at a store and that will support workers. They will earn wages and pay taxes and the money will flow through the economy.
> 
> ...


So what you're saying is the Liberals are giving money to people (like you) who don't need it and you are doing what should have been done and given it to those who do need it. Wonder why they couldn't have thought of that?


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

yyz said:


> So what you're saying is the Liberals are giving money to people (like you) who don't need it and you are doing what should have been done and given it to those who do need it. Wonder why they couldn't have thought of that?



Exactly, or as I suggested upthread, you simply make it taxable, and those that need it, get it, and guys like me get it all clawed back. Problem solved. Nope, instead they try and buy votes.

ltr


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Should someone with 10 years residency receive the same amount as someone with 40 years residency ?

The goal is to get the money out the door and spent, and that is what they did. They didn't want to waste time nitpicking who gets what.

The government stimulus money is based on two needs. The need to support people with less or no income AND the need to support the economy.

The Liberals have done a good job balancing both. Not perfect, but in the minds of most Canadians.....a good job.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Besides, how many people collecting OAS are earning $80,000 NET a year in income to get any OAS clawed back ?

That is twice the median wage for employees. I would think it affects very few seniors.


----------



## yyz (Aug 11, 2013)

sags said:


> The goal is to get the money out the door and spent, and that is what they did. They didn't want to waste time nitpicking who gets what.
> 
> The government stimulus money is based on two needs. The need to support people with less or no income AND the need to support the economy.
> 
> The Liberals have done a good job balancing both. Not perfect, but in the minds of most Canadians.....a good job.


Wrong again. they supported more than " the people with less or no income" and these people are not the target market to spend and support the economy.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> Besides, how many people collecting OAS are earning $80,000 NET a year in income to get any OAS clawed back ?
> 
> That is twice the median wage for employees. I would think it affects very few seniors.


Sags, they're giving millionaires $300. That shouldn't sit well with you or anyone else.

ltr


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Since they are going to be contributing more to pay off the debt, it seems fair to include them in the benefits.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Well........the WE scandal is over.

Trudeau recognized his error in judgement (understandable given the unusual circumstances) and has apologized to Canadians.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I hate that Folks with money can claim "Mistake" when anybody else would be charged with conspiracy to commit a fraud.

Same trip with the 2008 financial crisis in America ..... Rich Folks just make "Mistakes" and "Miscalulations". The Rich Folks only make "Innocent" mistakes and not "Stupid" Mistakes like Poor Folks.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I googled if there was any explanation for the government on why they didn't just add the OAS to regular benefits and make it taxable, and couldn't find a definitive answer.

This $300 benefit is tied to other benefits as a "package" with disability benefits and GIS etc totalling $600., so maybe that was a complicating factor.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> I googled if there was any explanation for the government on why they didn't just add the OAS to regular benefits and make it taxable, and couldn't find a definitive answer.
> 
> This $300 benefit is tied to other benefits as a "package" with disability benefits and GIS etc totalling $600., so maybe that was a complicating factor.


Or they wanted to make sure they had an election claim about how they gave so much money to yet another identifiable voting block.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

sags said:


> Well........the WE scandal is over.
> 
> Trudeau recognized his error in judgement (understandable given the unusual circumstances) and has apologized to Canadians.


So just because Trudeau "apologized" for another massive breach in ethics (only after he was caught), an investigation is no longer needed?

Crooks like Trudeau get elected because people like sags with weak morals and poor judgment support them.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I watched the committee question the finance minister yesterday.

When Trudeau and The Clowns introduced the cabinet, it was said that the finance minister was the smartest guy in the room.

Yesterday this same guy played stupid all day long and claimed to be suffering from dementia.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Trudeau should immediately call for a fall election to seek a new mandate from the people.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> I watched the committee question the finance minister yesterday.
> 
> When Trudeau and The Clowns introduced the cabinet, it was said that the finance minister was the smartest guy in the room.
> 
> Yesterday this same guy played stupid all day long and claimed to be suffering from dementia.


I don't doubt that he is/was.

It isn't like the Liberal Cabinet is a bastion of intellect.


----------



## 5Lgreenback (Mar 21, 2015)

calm said:


> I watched the committee question the finance minister yesterday.
> 
> When Trudeau and The Clowns introduced the cabinet, it was said that the finance minister was the smartest guy in the room.
> 
> Yesterday this same guy played stupid all day long and claimed to be suffering from dementia.


The acting by Trudeau and Morneau on this matter has been impressive. If I didn't know any better I'd think they actually believe their own BS. Typical LPC talk striving for morals and equality for all, but actions proving the opposite.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

5Lgreenback said:


> The acting by Trudeau and Morneau on this matter has been impressive.


Getting a traffic ticket has you remember each time you pass by the spot where you were stopped.
When "We" was being discussed, Morneau would of remembered the conflict of interest issues (tickets) from the past.
I don't care how much money he has ...... the reason he was able to accumulate such wealth was because he tracked every penny he spent.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> Getting a traffic ticket has you remember each time you pass by the spot where you were stopped.
> When "We" was being discussed, Morneau would of remembered the conflict of interest issues (tickets) from the past.
> I don't care how much money he has ...... the reason he was able to accumulate such wealth was because he tracked every penny he spent.


The guy who "forgot" about his Villa in France?
You think he tracked every penny?

These guys are either.
1. Unbelievably incompetent
2. Sociopaths.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

I doubt that there is much difference between corruption and questionable dealing by poiticians in Quebec and those in other provinces. At least not in my experience living in Ontario, Quebec, BC, and Alberta.

The only difference I see is when it happens in Quebec the politcians start with denials and move on start pointing fingers at the 'other guy'.. In our experience Ontario and Alberta politicians close ranks, stay stum, and ride it out. BC, in our experience, is a combination of both. Greed and public corruption are not defined by provincial boundaries.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

I'm wondering who here has never taken a paper clip home from the office. Theft, pure and simple. LOL

Every job has its 'perks'. Some are perks you are entitled to and some are just perks you THINK you should be entitled to. Truth be told, we all take advantage of whatever we think we can get away with. The only difference is that most of us are not subject to scrutiny by the media and the public. We only have to avoid scrutiny by an employer.

Which reminds me, I still have a small hand held tape recorder in my desk drawer. For dictating notes for my secretary to later type up. Never did get around to giving it back to the company after I left. Maybe I should turn myself in.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> I'm wondering who here has never taken a paper clip home from the office. Theft, pure and simple. LOL
> 
> Every job has its 'perks'. Some are perks you are entitled to and some are just perks you THINK you should be entitled to. Truth be told, we all take advantage of whatever we think we can get away with. The only difference is that most of us are not subject to scrutiny by the media and the public. We only have to avoid scrutiny by an employer.
> 
> Which reminds me, I still have a small hand held tape recorder in my desk drawer. For dictating notes for my secretary to later type up. Never did get around to giving it back to the company after I left. Maybe I should turn myself in.


Handing millions of tax dollars to friends and family isn't a "perk".
I do know of places that would write people up and terminate for stealing office supplies.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I know a person who stole a barbequed chicken from a grocery store and went to jail for a year.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

calm said:


> I know a person who stole a barbequed chicken from a grocery store and went to jail for a year.


That seems very unlikely in Canada. Can you back that up?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It's possible. I was in court awaiting a case for a friend of my son's, and a young guy pled guilty to stealing a chicken from a grocery store.

The Crown was asking for 6 months custody time. To listen to the Crown the guy had committed a heinous crime that deserved a custody sentence. The local police had numerous officers chasing the guy through alleys and backyards for hours before they apprehended him. The court's precious time had been taken up........blah, blah, blah.

This particular judge went on a rant about the deplorable conditions in the local detention center and said he wasn't about to send the guy there for stealing a chicken. He gave the guy probation. The judge went on to suggest to the guy he straighten out and apply for the police force, as obviously he could chase down suspects better than the local cops.

That is typical for the prosecutor but perhaps not as typical for a judge. Another judge might well have sent the lad to prison for a few months.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Mukhang pera said:


> That seems very unlikely in Canada. Can you back that up?


I guess you will just need to take my word on it.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> Handing millions of tax dollars to friends and family isn't a "perk".


The Trudeau Apology Crowd thinks it's just fine. Had it been Harper they would have been calling for his head.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

All shoplifters should just claim that they forgot to pay like Morneau and The Clowns.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

calm said:


> I guess you will just need to take my word on it.


I'll do no such thing. I know a falsehood when I see one. The only way your story could be in any way accurate is if there was something very significant omitted from your account, such as he pointed a loaded gun at the store clerk while stealing said chicken.

I have read literally thousands of sentencing decisions from criminal courts in Canada and I know it would just not happen that someone would get a custodial sentence in the range of 1 year for stealing a small amount of food. Even someone with a significant criminal record, although that would be regarded as an aggravating circumstance and might get one a few months of jail time. A first offender would certainly not go to jail. Not for theft under $5,000 _simpliciter. _As I said, if there was some other offence being committed at the same time, or the offender was being sentenced at the same time for a separate offence, then jail time could be on the table.

Below is a BC case where the Court of Appeal upheld a one-year sentence for 3 counts of what might be considered petty theft. So yes, one year. But the offender had a record of 60 criminal convictions spanning many years. If our chicken thief was in that league, your account could possibly be true. But then it would be very misleading to make the bald statement that you know someone who went to jail for a year for stealing a chicken. 


PROPERTY OFFENCES — Theft — Sentence • SENTENCING — Considerations — Pre-trial custody — Accused, with extensive record of continuous crime dating back many years, pleading guilty to 3 theft counts arising from 3 incidents of shoplifting — Provincial Court judge imposing jail term of 1 year — Appeal court finding no error in that sentence, apart from failure to deal with 24 days of pre-sentence custody — Court allowing double credit and reducing sentence by 48 days accordingly.


R. v. Gibbs C.A., Rowles, Prowse & Lowry JJ.A., 2007 BCCA 241, Vancouver CA034780, April 23, 2007 (oral), 9pp.

For some further context, I offer:

PROPERTY OFFENCES — Theft — Sentence • Accused, with lengthy related record, succeeding in 2004 in having Court of Appeal reduce his sentence for possession of stolen truck from 20 months’ imprisonment to 14-month conditional sentence — While under the conditional sentence order, and in breach of recognizance, police finding accused in possession of 2 stolen trucks — On conviction for those offences, court imposing sentence of 3 years — Appeal court upholding that sentence.

So, the sentence was initially 14 months conditional, meaning no jail time, for a person with a long record stealing a truck. 

R. v. Westlake C.A., Finch C.J.B.C., Ryan & Donald JJ.A., 2007 BCCA 294, Vancouver CA034359, May 11, 2007 (oral), 6pp.




__





2007 BCCA 294 R. v. Westlake






www.bccourts.ca





And how about this recent case:

PROPERTY OFFENCES — Theft — Sentence • SENTENCING — Probation — Breach of probation • OBSTRUCTION — Obstruction of peace officer — Accused, 60, with related record, pleading guilty to using a stolen truck to break into a shop and steal tire rims, breach of probation order, obstructing peace officer, and theft of truck — Aggravating factors including criminal record that included 16 convictions for possession of stolen property, and that accused was on probation when offences committed — Mitigating factors including guilty plea and accused’s progress in rehabilitation programs while incarcerated — After 12 months’ credit for time served accused sentenced to 6 months’ imprisonment followed by 18 months’ probation.

R. v. Saunders S.C., G.P. Weatherill J., 2019 BCSC 1889, Kamloops 106508-2, July 3, 2019 (oral), 8pp., • N. Flanagan, for Crown; S. Tate, for accused.

The offender described in that case looks like more of a criminal - a lot more - than a hungry chicken thief. He has a criminal record and gets convicted of truck theft, break and enter and theft, plus breach of probation (he was on probation when he re-offended) and obstruct PO. Yet, he was given an effective 18-month sentence. How do we reconcile that with 12 months for boosting a chicken, unless something has been omitted from the chicken story?

And, humour me, while I cite just one more, to show how daft I see your chicken story to be:

PROPERTY OFFENCES — Theft under $5,000 — Sentence • SENTENCING — Conditional sentences — Availability — Accused working as a "screener" at Vancouver International Airport, assisting passengers in placing personal property into the x-ray machine at the pre-boarding screening area — Video surveillance showing that on 8 occasions in early 2014, the accused took money from wallets placed in plastic bins to be x-rayed — Although the 8 offences involved a breach of trust, court ordering a 12-month conditional sentence — Terms including house arrest and 100 hours of community work service.

R. v. Ruvinskiy Prov. Ct., St. Pierre Prov J., 2014 BCPC 0265, Richmond 59083-3C, November 4, 2014 , 9pp., • G. Nelson, for Crown; W.M. Cuthbertson, for accused.




__





2014 BCPC 265 (CanLII) | R. v. Ruvinskiy | CanLII


Access all information related to judgment R. v. Ruvinskiy, 2014 BCPC 265 (CanLII) on CanLII.



www.canlii.org





Without more, does not our misguided airport screener look like a greater miscreant that our cotton pickin' finger lickin' chicken thief? 

Do you see why I doubt your chicken thief account? It could only be true if there was a related, untold, story.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Mukhang pera said:


> I'll do no such thing. I know a falsehood when I see one.


Please become unconvinced.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> Please become unconvinced.


Please provide evidence that such a thing happened.
You made an outrageous claim, that doesn't seem to be supported by any facts, and you're unable to provide evidence.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

I owe you no explanation.
There was a time when you went to jail for 6 months just for vagrancy.
I could care less if you believe what I said or not.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

*WE *The North, remember?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> I owe you no explanation.
> There was a time when you went to jail for 6 months just for vagrancy.
> I could care less if you believe what I said or not.


Yes, but the 60's are over, and the vast majority of the population wasn't even alive when vagrancy was a crime.

Unless otherwise specified, we're typically talking about things that happened within the last few decades.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I would think a term of incarceration is for serious crimes or a background of serious crimes, but that is not always the case.

Alex Kargus, a 29 year old with some minor past criminal problems was sentenced to 162 days in prison for using fake id to get a tax refund.

He was beaten to death in the Elgin Middlesex Detention Center, a maximum security prison, when he was housed with another inmate who was serving a sentence for murder and had been transferred to Elgin for beating another inmate in a different prison.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

Ahhh..."minor criminal problems". How many and how minor?


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

MrMatt said:


> Unless otherwise specified, we're typically talking about things that happened within the last few decades.


The incident happened in March 1965, Toronto, and Morton Shulman was involved.








Morton Shulman - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Bloc says that if Trudeau and Morneau don't resign by September, they will be calling for a non-confidence vote.

Will Conservatives stand up for their "principles" or are they just blowing hot air ? Time will tell.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Canada will not vote Conservative during this pandemic because off the history with Conservatives cutting social programs. I think if an election were held today, Trudeau would win a majority.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

sags said:


> The Bloc says that if Trudeau and Morneau don't resign by September, they will be calling for a non-confidence vote.
> 
> Will Conservatives stand up for their "principles" or are they just blowing hot air ? Time will tell.


Why is the rest of the Liberal party letting Trudeau get away with this?


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Prairie Guy said:


> Why is the rest of the Liberal party letting Trudeau get away with this?


They see Trudeau as the person best able to provide electoral success. 
If he is forced to resign in disgrace, it's bad for the party.

More cynical views
I think he's too narcissistic to step out on his own.
There are several others involved with these shenanigans, and they're vulnerable to an attack if they try to force him out. 
Lots of second tier Liberals have tied themselves to Trudeau, and a newcomer to clean up would put some pressure on them. Remember Trudeau, Butts & crew have been very autocratic, I'm sure the internal politics are huge.
I think several of the insiders (in government and outside) think this is "normal" and acceptable, and there is no real problem, other than some troublemakers are making a big deal out of it.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

The larger crime is "Consultants" ...

All political parties use "Consultation" as a cash cow. That is where the real crime takes place.
There are billions being paid to consultants who just happen to be political insiders.
Many more millions are paid to advertising agencies which are owned and operated by political insiders. The Gomery inquiry pointed that out.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

calm said:


> The larger crime is "Consultants" ...
> 
> All political parties use "Consultation" as a cash cow. That is where the real crime takes place.
> There are billions being paid to consultants who just happen to be political insiders.
> Many more millions are paid to advertising agencies which are owned and operated by political insiders. The Gomery inquiry pointed that out.


I have a solution.
Smaller government to focus on the core responsibilities of Government.

If they had far less money, it would be harder to siphon off as much to friends and insiders.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The Conservatives don't need to wait around hoping for some extremely unlikely scenario where the Liberals would vote against their own leader.

If they don't believe they would win a legitimate election, maybe they don't deserve to govern anyways. Best they sit on the sidelines and whine.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> I got a solution.
> Smaller government to focus on the core responsibilities of Government.
> 
> If they had far less money, it would be harder to siphon off as much to friends and insiders.


Please MrMatt. 'I've got' or 'I have' a solution. Not 'I got'. Poor use of English only makes an opinion less likely to influence others.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Prairie Guy said:


> Why is the rest of the Liberal party letting Trudeau get away with this?


That is like the Blue Jays winning 10-0 and the other team demanding they forfeit the game.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

Tweet:
By Alex Pierson
Now we know why the WE boys wouldn’t answer ⁦⁦@PierrePoilievre
⁩ question. I guess they need to come back to the hot seat.
July 29, 2020

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288636842745765890


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

WE was paying a Republican strategy group to defend itself against libel propogated by right wing media Canadaland ?

It sounds like a cross border right wing conservative squabble was underway. Trudeau was right to pull out of the arrangement with WE.

With all the food fighting going on with the Conservatives groups, it was getting pretty messy anyways.


----------



## calm (May 26, 2020)

sags said:


> Trudeau was right to pull out of the arrangement with WE.


The WE deal was signed with a section of WE that had no assets which could be seized if WE did not properly perform the contract.
That is pretty fishy to me.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Yes, the Liberals were wise to pull the funding. Apparently, this charity goes back to the Harper government days.


----------



## Prairie Guy (Oct 30, 2018)

sags said:


> Yes, the Liberals were wise to pull the funding. Apparently, this charity goes back to the Harper government days.


Ah...so Harper is to blame for Trudeau's corruption and repeated ethics violations today. Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## newfoundlander61 (Feb 6, 2011)

At some point someone will be put under the bus and resign, no the PM but not sure. Don't think it would be the Finance minister with the Pandemic going on.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Do Canadians even care about such trivial matters ? I doubt it. They care about being financially supported by the government during this pandemic.

It sounds like more CERB is on the way, and mortgage deferrals will be extended for more months. Good news for hard hit Canadians.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Do Canadians even care about such trivial matters ? I doubt it. They care about being financially supported by the government during this pandemic.
> 
> It sounds like more CERB is on the way, and mortgage deferrals will be extended for more months. Good news for hard hit Canadians.


If people really don't care that Trudeau wanted to give his friends and family 400 million dollars, we have a problem.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I think Canadians know the difference between the facts and Conservative hyperbole.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

MrMatt said:


> If people really don't care that Trudeau wanted to give his friends and family 400 million dollars, we have a problem.


Umm, which friends and family did he want to give $400 million to? I thought the money was going to be given to students albeit minus an administration fee. Nowhere have I heard $400 million was going to be given to Trudeau's friends and family. Methinks you do exaggerate too much MrMatt.

On a lighter note, I just made a typo which I corrected. But after I did, I thought how some Trudeau bashers would have liked it and might want to use it. I typed Turdeau, a simply transposition of the r and u. I'm not a Trudeau basher personally but I don't mind giving those who are something to have fun with if they want to.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> Umm, which friends and family did he want to give $400 million to? I thought the money was going to be given to students albeit minus an administration fee. Nowhere have I heard $400 million was going to be given to Trudeau's friends and family. Methinks you do exaggerate too much MrMatt.
> 
> On a lighter note, I just made a typo which I corrected. But after I did, I thought how some Trudeau bashers would have liked it and might want to use it. I typed Turdeau, a simply transposition of the r and u. I'm not a Trudeau basher personally but I don't mind giving those who are something to have fun with if they want to.


$900 million to We, $500 million to students.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/we-charity-student-grants-trudeau-covid-pandemic-1.5664391



Where does the other $400 million go?
I'm sure that they'll find a way to funnel that to Liberal backers somehow, maybe give it to the big unions or something.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The money was budgeted if necessary, but wasn't necessarily going to be spent. It depended on how many students were involved.

WE and the other charities involved were to receive "up to" 43 million, if all the money was spent. (if the program was a huge success)

Mr.Matt posted the link, but apparently doesn't read past the headline.

Trudeau answered all the questions during the hearing, and Pierre Poutine said "nobody believed him". 

Sorry Pierre.....You are the one most Canadians don't believe.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Conservative leader Andrew Scheer made a huge announcement to the media.

He said he demanded Trudeau and Morneau resign immediately !

Thanks for stopping by Andy..........LOL.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The money was budgeted if necessary, but wasn't necessarily going to be spent. It depended on how many students were involved.
> 
> WE and the other charities involved were to receive "up to" 43 million, if all the money was spent. (if the program was a huge success)
> 
> ...


I did read the entire article.
The We Charities were getting up to $43 million.
The students were to get up to $500 million.
The other $350 million would then be free to go to non-student/non-we charity groups and individuals.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> Conservative leader Andrew Scheer made a huge announcement to the media.
> 
> He said he demanded Trudeau and Morneau resign immediately !
> 
> Thanks for stopping by Andy..........LOL.


Call me when an opposition leader does not demand the government resign.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

andrewf said:


> Call me when an opposition leader does not demand the government resign.


Call me when the opposition has a leader.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Longtimeago said:


> On a lighter note, I just made a typo which I corrected. But after I did, I thought how some Trudeau bashers would have liked it and might want to use it. I typed Turdeau, a simply transposition of the r and u. I'm not a Trudeau basher personally but I don't mind giving those who are something to have fun with if they want to.


I voted Liberal and I have referred to Turdeau and Moroneau since they screwed up their attempt to tax the rich while hitting the middle class. I thought "What a bunch of morons!" These trust fund kids have no idea how business works!


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

kcowan said:


> I voted Liberal and I have referred to Turdeau and Moroneau since they screwed up their attempt to tax the rich while hitting the middle class. I thought "What a bunch of morons!" These trust fund kids have no idea how business works!


You think that's bad, I voted for Dalton McGuinty on his first run through Ontario.
If you're not aware, he broke almost every single election promise, many within the first few days.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Anyone that pays attention would realize that Trudeau thinks he can get away with the sh*t he is pulling. And sadly, he might!


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

kcowan said:


> Anyone that pays attention would realize that Trudeau thinks he can get away with the sh*t he is pulling. And sadly, he might!


I'm not sure if he thinks he can get away with it, or if he honestly doesn't understand why his behaviour is wrong.

I'm actually leaning to the second one. He's got to realize this behaviour is politically expensive. I think he's actually more incompetent than malevolent.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Criminals think like criminals. Maybe Trudeau just doesn't think like a criminal.

Some Conservatives on the other hand, seem to have no problem thinking up all the criminal possibilities.

Let's not forget that Andrew Scheer got caught taking money from the Conservative funds to pay for private school, minivan, clothes, and an extra housekeeper.









Internal audit of Scheer’s spending reveals party money spent on school, clothes, minivan - National | Globalnews.ca


The money for schooling paid the difference between the cost of private parochial school in the Scheers' Regina home and that in Ottawa.




globalnews.ca





Or that in 2015 Stephen Harper and Pierre Poilievre got caught using taxpayer funds to film "vanity" videos for an upcoming election.

Maybe the Conservatives are projecting what they would be doing if in Trudeau's place.

_Employment Minister Pierre Poilievre commissioned a team of public servants for overtime work on a Sunday to film him glad-handing constituents in promotion of the Conservative government's benefits for families.

The ensuing taxpayer-funded video – and other recent ones like it – are prompting concern that the Conservatives have taken a new step in the use of public funds to produce "vanity videos."

The Conservatives have faced criticism over the past year for the production of videos highlighting Prime Minister Stephen Harper's activities as part of an online show called 24 Seven. One of these videos landed Mr. Harper in trouble this month during a visit to Iraq when an episode showed the faces of Canadian Armed Forces members, potentially placing them at risk.

It now appears that Mr. Poilievre is taking a similar approach with his department's funds._


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Let's not forget that Andrew Scheer got caught taking money from the Conservative funds to pay for private school, minivan, clothes, and an extra housekeeper.


Yes, and the Conservative response is to fire him.
On the first offense.


When is Trudeau or Morneau going to held accountable for their misdeeds?
This is #3 for Trudeau and #2 for Morneau for ethics violations.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Scheer is still the leader and Poilievre is the public spokesman.........so nope. The Conservatives did nothing. They got rid of Scheer because he can't win.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Scheer is still the leader and Poilievre is the public spokesman.........so nope. The Conservatives did nothing. They got rid of Scheer because he can't win.


He resigned when the allegations surfaced. 
The CPC accepted his resignation and initiated a leadership competition.

Sure he might have been likely to get the boot anyway. But he pre-empted it, and saved a lot of time and trouble.

Apparently one of the WE guys testified only $200 million was going to students.
Someone else did the math, the "volunteers" would have to work 500 hours over the 10 weeks of summer to get the full $5k. Think about that, Trudeaus great plan was to have students work at less than minimum wage, for more than the legal workweek (in several provinces) for their entire summer.
The same summer that Truduea scheduled off for himself, with the help of the NDP.

This We mess was a poorly thought out disaster.


----------



## Longtimeago (Aug 8, 2018)

I'm more interested in just what this WE organization actually is. What seems to be coming out of all this is that it MAY not be the charitable organization most people think it is. They seem to be involved in some things and in ways that are not all admirable.

It may be a case of like many things (Airbnb comes to mind) where the original purpose was fine but as more and more MONEY became involved, the focus shifts from the original intent to making money.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Longtimeago said:


> I'm more interested in just what this WE organization actually is. What seems to be coming out of all this is that it MAY not be the charitable organization most people think it is. They seem to be involved in some things and in ways that are not all admirable.
> 
> It may be a case of like many things (Airbnb comes to mind) where the original purpose was fine but as more and more MONEY became involved, the focus shifts from the original intent to making money.


WE is a web of a variety of organizations and shell companies that's managed to build a valuable brand, and connect with a lot of different stakeholders, and weasel themselves into a number of lucrative government contracts.

It's also clear they've managed to cultivate relationships with a variety of influential people and organizations.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Since the Liberals cancelled the funding, it is all supposition on how much they might have spent to do this or do that.

Bottom line is that problem arose and the Liberals took care of it. That is what government is supposed to do.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Since the Liberals cancelled the funding, it is all supposition on how much they might have spent to do this or do that.
> 
> Bottom line is that problem arose and the Liberals took care of it. That is what government is supposed to do.


Bottom line is that the Liberals tried to give millions of dollars to friends and family, while screwing over students.

They had other programs set up, ready to go, to distribute this funding.
Instead they didn't give it to the people who needed it.

Sorry, there is no way to spin WE as a good thing. The only good thing is they got caught.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

There is no evidence the Liberals were trying to give anything to friends and family.

The paid appearances by Trudeau's mother, brother and wife happened years ago. Nobody has been paid anything since he has been PM.

The Conservatives are clutching at straws (or is it their pearls) and are guilty of trying to base their arguments on false allegations.

If the Conservatives can't be trusted to tell the truth about these simple facts, Canadians can't trust them as a government.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> The paid appearances by Trudeau's mother, brother and wife happened years ago. Nobody has been paid anything since he has been PM.


You know that claim is false.

Oh, when did Morneaus daughter depart from WE?
You don't see anything wrong with handing millions to your daughters employer?

Oh, and just so you know Trudeau has been PM since 2015, we paid out almost $300k to the Trudeaus since 2016.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/margaret-justin-trudeau-we-charity-1.5643586


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Sophie Trudeau was paid $1500 in 2012. It was to reimburse travel expenses. She donates a lot of her time to the charity.

Margaret was paid $250,000 for 28 fund raising speeches over many years. The speaker's bureau collected 20% so she received $200,000. That is an average of $7,142 per speech.

After taxes, she probably didn't earn more than $6,000 per speech. These fees cover traveling expenses, so she might have made $5,000 a speech as income.

Edward was paid $30,000 for 8 fund raising speeches. The speaker bureau took $6,000 as their fee and he received $24,000 for an average of $3,000 a speech.

After taxes and travel expenses, that wouldn't leave a lot left for income.

As for Bill Morneau.....he had already repaid a round of travel expenses and donated $100,000 to the charity. He lapsed on reimbursing the other travel fees.

His one daughter worked for free as a volunteer and the other one worked under a temporary contract. Nothing much to see there.

The Conservatives should spend their time developing some policies relable to Canadians, instead of wasting their time on this nonsense.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I do agree that Trudeau should have steered well clear of this particular charity.

It is a holdover from the Harper government and he should have ditched it overboard.

But, he is a busy guy and can't think of everything.


----------

