Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 2403
Reputation: 166.3Reputation: 166.3
votes: 6

PostPosted: Mon Dec 17, 2012 6:24 pm    Post subject: Carney's judgment in question Reply with quote

I don't know what to think of this, exactly.

Quote:
Carney's judgment in question

The impartiality of the Bank of Canada governor's office has taken a hit because of what can only be described as a lack of judgment by its current occupant, Mark Carney, to accept an invitation to stay for nearly a week last summer at the Nova Scotia house of Liberal MP and finance critic Scott Brison.

The stayover, first reported by The Globe and Mail Saturday and confirmed Monday by the Bank of Canada, happened while Brison and many other Liberals were actively trying to recruit Carney to run for the Liberal leadership.

Though Carney would ultimately reject those entreaties - he has since announced he'll quit his Bank of Canada governor's job early to take over as the governor of the Bank of England next summer - his summer vacation has put partisan politics into a position which must remain purer than snow when it comes to politics.

For the record, Bank of Canada spokesman Jeremy Harrison says that the bank's in-house lawyer, Jeremy Farr, says there is nothing to see here, that there is no violation of any bank conflict-of-interest policy.

[....]

My sources on Bay Street shrug at my concerns, noting that Carney's dances with Liberals do not seem to have had any effect on his job of setting the country's monetary policy.

[....]

Now that we know about Carney's stay with Brison, for example, what are to make of two speeches Carney made within weeks after that stay which quite clearly were rebuttals to observations made by Liberal opponent NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair about the "Dutch Disease" ailing the Canadian economy?

Clearly, Liberals stood to benefit if the Bank of Canada governor could make Mulcair and the NDP look like they had no idea what they were talking about when it comes to the economy.

Carney's speeches - one to a CAW convention and one to a Calgary conference - were important at the time precisely because they were made by a bank governor who was clearly above politics. But now, knowing these speeches were made while senior Liberals were still in hot pursuit of the governor, the moral authority of the words Carney spoke is weakened even though, as bank spokesman Harrison says, the speeches were arranged well in advance and are entirely in keeping with the bank's long-held and publicized views about various economic phenomena.

Carney was not taking calls from reporters Monday.
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/s.....62042.html


This feels like mischief-making There's a lot of interesting information here. First, the the Liberals have a search committee out, looking for a candidate to run against Justin Sinclair-Trudeau. And, secondly, they are recruiting senior people in the civil service, looking for a star.

I wonder if this would have come out if Carney stayed with the Bank of Canada.

Or if Carney was soliciting offers, exploiting Canada's reputation to his own personal benefit to get a promotion?

Personally, I think he can be replaced. A lot of the credit for Canada's relative financial strength goes back to Paul Martin's vetoing some bank mergers when he was finance minister. The banks wanted to unite so they could play in the derivatives game in a bigger way. We could have been like Iceland.

Should top figures in the civil service be allowed to move into partisan political groups in leadership roles? Good question. I don't know ... I could imagine it working out well.

Comments?
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 6443
Reputation: 247.5
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How many investigations have the opposition demanded (and in many cases received) against the CPC for a "potential" wrongdoing?

Scott Brison is the Liberal Finance Critic; he also isn't exactly the definition of "above board" when it comes to ethics rules.

(Just a reminder)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com.....cle704449/

We just had an Federal Election result thrown out (then reinstated) because of the possibility that fraud occurred, not that it did because they didn't charge anyone but only because it was possible that it might have.

Here we have the Liberal Finance Critic of a leaderless party having the Governor of the Bank of Canada stay at his home for a week amongst rumours that Carney was a "contender" for Liberal Leadership.

This doesn't pass the smell test;

Carney had a major lapses in judgement;
However the Liberals find themselves in a situation where they had access to a sitting Governor of the Bank of Canada in an off the books setting.

That is an issue;

If Beverley McLachlin had stay at Rob Nicholson's cottage for a week do you think the opposition may have an issue with that?

What sort of Liberal Party is Bob Rae leaving for the next guy exactly?

Vicileak's resulted in a staffer being dismissed;
Which was the correct ethical move to make.

I don't understand why at a minimum Brison isn't being asked to sit on the sidelines while they Liberals assure that this isn't something that is going to be much worse for them?

If a CPC MP like Wajid Khan had to sit as an independent till he was cleared; why isn't Brison being asked to do the same?
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 2403
Reputation: 166.3Reputation: 166.3
votes: 6

PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There certainly seems to be a double-standard.

You seem to be implying that it doesn't matter that the visit seems not to have had any effect on the policies of the Bank of Canada. It's simply that one of the slimier Liberal Party operators got unsupervised time with the Chairman, and it requires an explanation.

Carney was there for a week? Surely more was going on than smoking Habanas and clinking ice cubes? I can't imagine that there weren't some negotiations going on, or a power-point pitch being presented. In the end, I suspect that the Liberals couldn't guarantee what they offered.

There's a lot we don't know about this meeting, it seems. Who else,if anybody, was there during that week? Any tele-conferencing? Telephone calls?

I guess I have to concede you your point.
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 6443
Reputation: 247.5
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
There certainly seems to be a double-standard.

You seem to be implying that it doesn't matter that the visit seems not to have had any effect on the policies of the Bank of Canada. It's simply that one of the slimier Liberal Party operators got unsupervised time with the Chairman, and it requires an explanation.


The opposition has already set a precedent for scandal in this sitting of Parliament.

The perception of wrongdoing is enough to warrant an investigation.
There is no question that this situation seems questionable, Carney's position is no different in terms of the greater impact it has on Canada then a Supreme Court Justice.

Friends or otherwise the opposition finance critic had the sitting Governor of the Bank of Canada in one of his homes for a week,

The perception of wrongdoing is present;

Bugs wrote:
Carney was there for a week? Surely more was going on than smoking Habanas and clinking ice cubes? I can't imagine that there weren't some negotiations going on, or a power-point pitch being presented. In the end, I suspect that the Liberals couldn't guarantee what they offered.

There's a lot we don't know about this meeting, it seems. Who else,if anybody, was there during that week? Any tele-conferencing? Telephone calls?


If its established that it was a recruiting mission of a sitting Governor of the Bank of Canada who could have very well furthered his cause for leadership while in his post till he opted to leave it,

Then Brison and the Liberals need to be looked at very seriously;

Even the rumour of the Tories courting General Rick Hillier to run for them while he was sitting in his previous position had opposition supporters clamoring conflict.

Why is this any different?
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 2403
Reputation: 166.3Reputation: 166.3
votes: 6

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah ... you're right.

I ponder ... Brison isn't interested in affecting the Bank's policy on anything. He may be opportunistic with information, and feed it to market operators, but that's not likely his intent. It has to be to recruit Carney as the 'right wing' Liberal to face off against Trudeau.

What else?

But what would an investigation do? Carney is out of reach, and who cares about the dubious ethics of the third party's finance critic?

The thing is, Carney would have had to resign and enter the Liberal Party official race, would he not? He'd have to do it pretty quickly. That's a big ante ...

Just by the way, did'ja know that the housing allowance attached to the Bank of England chairmanship is over $400,000 a year?
cosmostein





Joined: 04 Oct 2006
Posts: 6443
Reputation: 247.5
votes: 21
Location: The World

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:

I ponder ... Brison isn't interested in affecting the Bank's policy on anything. He may be opportunistic with information, and feed it to market operators, but that's not likely his intent. It has to be to recruit Carney as the 'right wing' Liberal to face off against Trudeau.


I don't think the "benefit of the doubt" should apply in any cases such as this, his intention is ultimately moot. The position Carney had was a non-partisan one, and regardless of the "why" he was there, the reality is simply that he was.

Brison has already established he isnt exactly an iron vault with information he isn't suppose to share, and the fact that he potentially had access to someone who could assist his friends in the private sector for a week in his home is enough for me to want some clarifications.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1

  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Carney's judgment in question

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB