So, Paul Martin.
Links on topic:
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040211.wmart0211/BNStory/National/
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040211.wagag0210/BNStory/National/
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040211.wgaglian0211/BNStory/National/
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040211.wgagli0211/BNStory/National/
So, yeah. Those links may not really be needed, if only because it's all the news seems to be talking about.
The Globe and Mail's online poll says that:
Do you believe Prime Minister Martin was, at the time, unaware of the spending irregularities cited in the Auditor-General's report?
Yes: 26%
No: 74%
What are everyone's thoughts?
My first instinct is to say that Martin is innocent, if only because I believe very strongly in his ambition. In the wake of 1997's election, he was organizing and recruiting, preparing for a leadership race he thought would take place before the next federal election. Why take the chance and do something so stupid and politically explosive, if he expected to be in the spotlight of a leadership race and a general election in the very near future?
I know as Finance Minister he would have nominally "signed the checks", but is it possible he didn't know? And then, we have to ask ourselves, was he intentionally blind? Which is about as bad in the eyes of the law and as bad in the political realm?
Cross posted to canpolitik and canadakicksass
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040211.wmart0211/BNStory/National/
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040211.wagag0210/BNStory/National/
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040211.wgaglian0211/BNStory/National/
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040211.wgagli0211/BNStory/National/
So, yeah. Those links may not really be needed, if only because it's all the news seems to be talking about.
The Globe and Mail's online poll says that:
Do you believe Prime Minister Martin was, at the time, unaware of the spending irregularities cited in the Auditor-General's report?
Yes: 26%
No: 74%
What are everyone's thoughts?
My first instinct is to say that Martin is innocent, if only because I believe very strongly in his ambition. In the wake of 1997's election, he was organizing and recruiting, preparing for a leadership race he thought would take place before the next federal election. Why take the chance and do something so stupid and politically explosive, if he expected to be in the spotlight of a leadership race and a general election in the very near future?
I know as Finance Minister he would have nominally "signed the checks", but is it possible he didn't know? And then, we have to ask ourselves, was he intentionally blind? Which is about as bad in the eyes of the law and as bad in the political realm?
Cross posted to canpolitik and canadakicksass