Close Menu
    Politik

    Konservative fordern eine ethische Untersuchung der Champagne, da Fragen zum Hochgeschwindigkeitszug aufgeworfen werden

    Share.
    View 7 Comments

    7 Kommentare

    1. AprilsMostAmazing on

      So let’s see Champagne tells everyone he can’t be involved in high speed rail because his wife has a high government position with the people in charge of it.

      CPC tries to turn this into partisan bullshit.

      In my opinion CPC is not a serious party and at this point i hope they split apart

    2. NewtoredditYVR on

      As a leader the PM’s critical responsibility is to put the best people in Ministerial Roles. He has failed miserably in this and surrounded himself with the most inept in it for themselves people you can find. When you can’t fire the whole team you fire the coach…

    3. Drummers_Beat on

      So let me get this straight. Champagne disclosed this and recused himself from this project (of which he’s not even the Minister for) and Michael Barrett still believes this warrants a lengthy investigation?

      What are you investigating? Like what?

      It’s stuff like this why there will be eligible voters in 2029 who have **never witnessed the Conservative Party of Canada win an election in their lifetimes**. Absurd.

    4. green_tory on

      Oh dear, Duff Conacher weighed in…

      >Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, said the system of ethics screens is ineffective. 

      >“Ethics screens should be banned because they are secretive smokescreens that are not independently enforced and do not prevent cabinet ministers and top government officials from participating in decision-making processes when they have a conflict of interest,“ he said.

      >“[They] hide the fact that the office holder is participating even when they or their family members or friends can profit or benefit from the decision.“

      In actual fact, [the Conflict of Interest screen](https://ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca/en/rules-reglements/Pages/CoIScreens-FiltresAntiCI.aspx) requires the definition of what the conflict is, a declaration of non-participation, and the appointment of an administrator whose job it is to prevent anything related to the conflict of interest from reaching your desk.

      So while they may be aware of what is happening *from their Spouse’s perspective* they are unable to receive information or act on information related to the conflict of interest *from their official role*. Because the communications, proposals, and so forth should never be revealed to them.

    5. SledgexHammer on

      Allow the probe and keep track of every single penny it costs, then when it concludes and finds no wrongdoing bill the CPC

    6. No-Section-1092 on

      CPC trying to turn the high speed rail project into a partisan political football is infuriating, but if it succeeds, it will be the last nail in the coffin proving that we are not a serious country deserving of nice things.

    7. pncoop on

      I recall Danielle Smith’s husband was a consultant to manage a proposed railway line between Calgary and Banff – neither he nor she declared a conflict. Yet is this is all okay for UCP and CPC.

    Leave A Reply