Calling On Jean Chretien
Presumably the legal experts at the Federal Court of Canada know how to apply the law in neutral fairness to ensure that best outcomes prevail for the country, under Canadian jurisprudence. But it is a bitter pill to swallow when their judgements, while upholding the letter of the law, appear to bring justice into question through allocating the satisfaction to those who appear undeserving of it.
Take, for example the decision to have former Prime Minister Jean Chretien awarded $200,000 of public, tax funding to cover a good portion of the legal costs resulting from his court challenge of the findings of the Gomery Commission into the sponsorship scandal.
Under Jean Chretien's watch, indeed under his express decision-making and perquisite-awarding, a substantial sum of tax money went into the coffers of Liberal supporters making a mockery of what was posited as a well-intentioned attempt to persuade Quebecers to remain within Confederation.
Judge Gomery did little to hide his disdain for the small-town-cheap style of the Right Honourable Jean Chretien, whose orientation and obvious ease at swilling at the public trough - offering opportunities to likewise partake of easy pickings was extended to his political supporters - was so blatantly rapacious. He was, yes, publicly biased.
Judge Gomery had charged that Jean Chretien shared responsibility in the scandal that ensued relating to the huge waste of tax-funded enticements that rained down on Quebec businessmen and the Liberal party in their unwholesome raiding of the public treasury under the direction of the PMO. Jean Chretien insisted that the political crisis of near-separation warranted intervention.
Which came in the form of liberally sprinkling millions of dollars around the Quebec landscape in a truly jaundiced and cynical and in the final analysis, absurd impulse to persuade Quebecers to cling to the Liberal party which controlled the swilling trough and was not loathe to spill some of its excess for love of the province.
It was Jean Chretien's blighted oversight and his casual contempt for those who dared assume to question the veracity of his intent, and the outcome of the looting of the treasury that brought the Liberal party to collapse. Not that this was an event, first of its kind, under the leadership of Jean Chretien for he had availed himself on previous occasions in a manner unworthy of his office.
The 'Little Guy from Shawinigan' has a thin skin for personal criticism, though it was his predecessor's presumed dirty dealings with Airbus and Karl-Heinz Schreiber that had him order an RCMP investigation into allegations of bribery benefiting former prime minister Brian Mulroney. Who himself did rather well, suing the government, as a result.
This is becoming a tedious tradition, former prime ministers attempting to shield their presumed 'good' legacies from being tainted by the perceived 'bad' legacies their stint in office inconveniently and outrageously revealed.
Personally, I'm with the current governing body which is scandalized by the prospect of using more tax funding to prop up a former, inept-toward-illicit-dealing prime minister, through returning a little bit of a fortune spent on legal fees by Jean Chretien.
"It is appropriate in this case that the lump sum award represent a significant contribution to the costs incurred by Mr. Chretien while remaining within acceptable standards for party-party costs representing a compromise between compensating the successful party while not unduly burdening the unsuccessful party", explained the ruling of Judge Francois Lemieux.
Good enough, in observing the interpretation of the letter of the law. A palatable end to the story would be better borne out with the adoption of a solution proffered by the current PMO: "It is our belief that the Liberal party must pay back the millions of dollars stolen from taxpayers through the sponsorship scandal. We call on Jean Chretien to give this $200,000 to taxpayers on behalf of the Liberal party".
Hear, hear.
Take, for example the decision to have former Prime Minister Jean Chretien awarded $200,000 of public, tax funding to cover a good portion of the legal costs resulting from his court challenge of the findings of the Gomery Commission into the sponsorship scandal.
Under Jean Chretien's watch, indeed under his express decision-making and perquisite-awarding, a substantial sum of tax money went into the coffers of Liberal supporters making a mockery of what was posited as a well-intentioned attempt to persuade Quebecers to remain within Confederation.
Judge Gomery did little to hide his disdain for the small-town-cheap style of the Right Honourable Jean Chretien, whose orientation and obvious ease at swilling at the public trough - offering opportunities to likewise partake of easy pickings was extended to his political supporters - was so blatantly rapacious. He was, yes, publicly biased.
Judge Gomery had charged that Jean Chretien shared responsibility in the scandal that ensued relating to the huge waste of tax-funded enticements that rained down on Quebec businessmen and the Liberal party in their unwholesome raiding of the public treasury under the direction of the PMO. Jean Chretien insisted that the political crisis of near-separation warranted intervention.
Which came in the form of liberally sprinkling millions of dollars around the Quebec landscape in a truly jaundiced and cynical and in the final analysis, absurd impulse to persuade Quebecers to cling to the Liberal party which controlled the swilling trough and was not loathe to spill some of its excess for love of the province.
It was Jean Chretien's blighted oversight and his casual contempt for those who dared assume to question the veracity of his intent, and the outcome of the looting of the treasury that brought the Liberal party to collapse. Not that this was an event, first of its kind, under the leadership of Jean Chretien for he had availed himself on previous occasions in a manner unworthy of his office.
The 'Little Guy from Shawinigan' has a thin skin for personal criticism, though it was his predecessor's presumed dirty dealings with Airbus and Karl-Heinz Schreiber that had him order an RCMP investigation into allegations of bribery benefiting former prime minister Brian Mulroney. Who himself did rather well, suing the government, as a result.
This is becoming a tedious tradition, former prime ministers attempting to shield their presumed 'good' legacies from being tainted by the perceived 'bad' legacies their stint in office inconveniently and outrageously revealed.
Personally, I'm with the current governing body which is scandalized by the prospect of using more tax funding to prop up a former, inept-toward-illicit-dealing prime minister, through returning a little bit of a fortune spent on legal fees by Jean Chretien.
"It is appropriate in this case that the lump sum award represent a significant contribution to the costs incurred by Mr. Chretien while remaining within acceptable standards for party-party costs representing a compromise between compensating the successful party while not unduly burdening the unsuccessful party", explained the ruling of Judge Francois Lemieux.
Good enough, in observing the interpretation of the letter of the law. A palatable end to the story would be better borne out with the adoption of a solution proffered by the current PMO: "It is our belief that the Liberal party must pay back the millions of dollars stolen from taxpayers through the sponsorship scandal. We call on Jean Chretien to give this $200,000 to taxpayers on behalf of the Liberal party".
Hear, hear.
posted by Pieface | 1:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home