The Shotgun Blog
« Gun Registry Overruns -- The Cost of Dithering | Main | The Shotgun is banned in China »
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
Ethics, Ottawa-style
Is this brand new? Or did I somehow miss the news reports on this? Because I can't find mention of it anywhere. Fresh on the heels of Gurmant Grewal's clearance of all the alleged monkey business at the Vancouver airport earlier this month, Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro has tabled a report (PDF, 1.6kb) into the apparent visas-for-cash program that Grewal had been accused of running out of his constituency office.
According to Shapiro:
"There was no real conflict of interest. No profit personal to Mr. Grewal was either intended or realized. That is, there is nothing to suggest that this practice actually furthered Mr. Grewal’s personal financial interest in any way.
Mr. Grewal’s actions did, however, place him in an apparent conflict of interest. The ambiguity, in the course of providing services to constituents, of requesting personal Personal Guarantees that are ostensibly to be backed by some sort of bond can reasonably be seen as raising question of whether he would personally benefit. While the practice may have benefitted many that might not otherwise received his support, it is clouded the actual immigration process for other individuals. MPs must be careful not to develop unsanctioned supplemental requirements to the statutory regimes in place.
I am convinced, however, that Mr. Grewal’s intention was not to benefit personally but rather to implement some due diligence measures in a context where it is not possible to know personally all of the individuals deserving of some special assistance."
I don’t want to let Grewal off the hook altogether. After all, “apparent conflict of interest” is something that Shapiro also gave the benefit of the doubt to Sgro for. But given that this investigation was instigated by Joe Volpe, who called in the RCMP and then leaked the matter to the press—and then the whole thing was then used as leverage against Grewal to try and procure his vote in the budget showdown, it seems to me that, in comparison, Grewal's offense here was pretty minor.
So, I'm wondering . . . when can we expect an ethics report on Volpe's actions?
UPDATE: Wow, turns out that I didn't miss the news at all. This is hot off the presses stuff and the Shotgun is the first Canadian site I've seen to break this story:
Here's Grewal's official reaction to the release of the report:
OTTAWA – Conservative MP Gurmant Grewal issued the following statement today, in response to a report issued by the Ethics Commissioner:
“I believe that the Ethics Commissioner’s report speaks for itself. From the moment that the Immigration Minister raised questions about the practices examined in this report, I have maintained that these questions were politically motivated, and had no basis in fact. I am pleased that the Ethics Commissioner has looked into the matter and determined that the Minister’s allegations were baseless. I am happy to accept his recommendations without reservation.”
Posted by Kevin Libin on June 22, 2005 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d834238cde53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ethics, Ottawa-style:
» Ethics Commissioner: Grewal Cleared from small dead animals
After weeks of "All Grewal, All Day", the vindications are starting to trickle in. Last week he was absolved by both the RCMP and Transport Canada in the Air Canada faux scandal - today the ethics commissioner has cleared him... [Read More]
Tracked on 2005-06-22 3:56:49 PM
Comments
Read the second page of Volpe's letter. "...the repetition of unfounded allegations can be very damaging... I want to ensure that the Member for Newton-North Delta does not suffer..."
And then Volpe leaks his complaint to the press. What a classic Librano move.
Posted by: Ezra Levant | 2005-06-22 3:01:46 PM
GOOD WORK Western Standard. You are FAST and you are FAIR. No wonder so many of us come here first and only buy and watch MSM media for comparitive scources.
I never had any doubts about Mr. Grewal's integrety and his tapes have PROVEN A POINT - he sacrificed his good name to show the rest of us how corrupt the Liberanos really are - he merly acted on the 'recomendation' of 'le Coq' of the treasury board who when confronted with Inky Mark's accusations, said 'Prove it'!
I have written to Mr. Grewal to tell him how proud I was of him and I would suggest that people who have questioned his taped 'proof' (like the paule and his gang) drop him a line, congratulating him - as they did for scrocrow when she was 'cleared'.
Posted by: Jema54 | 2005-06-22 3:54:16 PM
Honorable Gurmant Grewal has withstood a massive Liberal assault on his character. He expected this assault no doubt, and perhaps did not handle the entire situation with great success. It is important to remember, however, accusing a Prime Minister of criminal intent could never, and will never, be an easy thing to do...
Posted by: Knight of Good Mr. Iron Man | 2005-06-22 4:46:23 PM
It still amazes me that when a Liberal minister decides he will assassinate someone's reputation by leaking something, the press are on it like a pack of dogs, breathless as if it was big news that they themselves had uncovered. But when irrefutable hard evidence against Liberals -- such as the taped conversations -- rears up like a mountain range in the center of Ottawa, it is painstakingly ignored.
When can we expect an ethics report on the CBC?
Not that such a report would help Mr. Grewal. As Kevin Libin (I believe) put it, how do you un-assassinate someone's character?
Posted by: EBD | 2005-06-22 5:47:11 PM
When I was a young man, I was taught to think that most people are ethical, but some are not. Now that I'm about 2/3 of the way through, I'm starting to realize that some people are ethical, but many are not.
I've come to understand that the highest measure one can ascribe to one's fellow man is trust, and that trust is a much harder problem than I had initially understood.
Some might suggest this is a natural progression from youthful skepticistm to aged cynicism, but we hopeless optimists are immune to cynicism. Rather, I find it to be a healthy adjustment to my skeptic's metrics.
Your mileage may vary.
Posted by: Tony | 2005-06-22 8:50:31 PM
Well Tony, I'm also about 2/3 the way through and I have learned to not trust politicians(of any strip) cops and beaureaucrats.
Horny Toad
Posted by: Horny Toad | 2005-06-22 10:29:22 PM
I think, Mr. Toad, that the matter of trust goes beyond the assignment of taxonimical set-membership labels. Real trust is only something that can be extended from individual to individual, it cannot be extended to collectives.
Posted by: Tony | 2005-06-22 10:50:31 PM
You people do understand that Grewal was cleared because he was found to be too stupid to know better, right? That if he was to do this again he would be in violation of the ethical standards?
He overstepped both the Immigration Minister and Parliament with his actions of requiring 232 bonds he did not have the authority to request. He accepted applications from people turned down by other MPs, based upon these false bonds.
This is an embarassment for Grewal.
Fortunately, for him, idiocy is not unethical.
Posted by: Mark [Section 15] | 2005-06-22 10:56:22 PM
I think, Mark, that the argument some people are making is that independent of Mr. Grewal's competency and trustworthyness in this matter, the evidence at hand suggests beyond a resonable doubt that the Liberal Party of Canada was complicit in the violation of the public trust on the matter of member-of-parliament buying in the recent non-confidence fiasco.
Posted by: Tony | 2005-06-22 11:09:03 PM
Now we know the real reason PMPM said would no longer accept Grewal as a Liberal MP. He's not slimy enough to be a Liberal.
Posted by: Bear | 2005-06-23 1:36:38 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.