Perhaps a Musical Ride

Most have watched Canada’s “transparent” federal government dance of innocence as more revelations related to the latest Senate shenanigans unfold.

There is little point in reviewing the sordid details that have now received wide publicity. However, the RCMP has begun what may or may not be a thorough investigation and it is, therefore, worth examining the avenues the Mounties have to consider.

Liberal leader Justin Trudeau made specific reference to sections of the Criminal Code of Canada that may apply in relation to this unseemly mess. Specifically he mentioned s.119 and s.121 of that cumbersome document.

As a non-lawyer, I found yet another section that perhaps may apply – s.380.

If you are willing to slog through some legalistic language I have appended a copy word for word – of the three sections of the C.C.C. noted.

But I wonder just how thorough the RCMP investigation will be and where it will lead.

Will this investigation become a musical ride producing a myriad of excuses for why none of the above noted legislation is applicable? Will Harper duck for cover and pirogue Parliament – again? Will the Senate stagger on as an expensive, secretive, archaic dumping ground for party hacks?

Will Canadians finally say enough is enough?

Appendix – Selections from C.C.C.

CORRUPTION AND DISOBEDIENCE
Marginal note:Bribery of judicial officers, etc.
119. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years who
o (a) being the holder of a judicial office, or being a member of Parliament or of the legislature of a province, directly or indirectly, corruptly accepts, obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, for themselves or another person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by them in their official capacity, or
o (b) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives or offers to a person mentioned in paragraph (a), or to anyone for the benefit of that person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by that person in their official capacity.
Marginal note:Consent of Attorney General
(2) No proceedings against a person who holds a judicial office shall be instituted under this section without the consent in writing of the Attorney General of Canada.
Frauds on the government
121. (1) Every one commits an offence who
o (a) directly or indirectly
 (i) gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to an official or to any member of his family, or to any one for the benefit of an official, or
 (ii) being an official, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person for himself or another person,
a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with
 (iii) the transaction of business with or any matter of business relating to the government, or
 (iv) a claim against Her Majesty or any benefit that Her Majesty is authorized or is entitled to bestow,
whether or not, in fact, the official is able to cooperate, render assistance, exercise influence or do or omit to do what is proposed, as the case may be;
o (b) having dealings of any kind with the government, directly or indirectly pays a commission or reward to or confers an advantage or benefit of any kind on an employee or official of the government with which the dealings take place, or to any member of the employee’s or official’s family, or to anyone for the benefit of the employee or official, with respect to those dealings, unless the person has the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government with which the dealings take place;
o (c) being an official or employee of the government, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from a person who has dealings with the government a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person, unless they have the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government that employs them or of which they are an official;
o (d) having or pretending to have influence with the government or with a minister of the government or an official, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept, for themselves or another person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with
 (i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or
 (ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office;
o (e) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to a minister of the government or an official, or to anyone for the benefit of a minister or an official, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence, or an act or omission, by that minister or official, in connection with
 (i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or
 (ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office; or
o (f) having made a tender to obtain a contract with the government,
 (i) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to another person who has made a tender, to a member of that person’s family or to another person for the benefit of that person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the withdrawal of the tender of that person, or
 (ii) directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from another person who has made a tender a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person as consideration for the withdrawal of their own tender.
Marginal note:Contractor subscribing to election fund
(2) Every one commits an offence who, in order to obtain or retain a contract with the government, or as a term of any such contract, whether express or implied, directly or indirectly subscribes or gives, or agrees to subscribe or give, to any person any valuable consideration
o (a) for the purpose of promoting the election of a candidate or a class or party of candidates to Parliament or the legislature of a province; or
o (b) with intent to influence or affect in any way the result of an election conducted for the purpose of electing persons to serve in Parliament or the legislature of a province.
Marginal note:Punishment
(3) Every one who commits an offence under this section is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

380. (1) Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, defrauds the public or any person, whether ascertained or not, of any property, money or valuable security or any service,
o (a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years, where the subject-matter of the offence is a testamentary instrument or the value of the subject-matter of the offence exceeds five thousand dollars; or
o (b) is guilty
 (i) of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or
 (ii) of an offence punishable on summary conviction,
where the value of the subject-matter of the offence does not exceed five thousand dollars.
Marginal note:Minimum punishment
(1.1) When a person is prosecuted on indictment and convicted of one or more offences referred to in subsection (1), the court that imposes the sentence shall impose a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of two years if the total value of the subject-matter of the offences exceeds one million dollars.
Marginal note:Affecting public market
(2) Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, with intent to defraud, affects the public market price of stocks, shares, merchandise or anything that is offered for sale to the public is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

Harper strives to silence pesky environmentalists

By: Robert C. Henry 

I want to publicly congratulate Muskoka-Parry Sound MP Tony Clement and his boss Prime Minister Harper on their heroic efforts to silence and dismiss all pesky environmentalists and others of similar, dastardly, left-leaning ilk. 

I first thought of calling the prime minister but it’s obvious to most that he has, unfortunately, lost his hearing. Even the most casual observer will note that he simply can’t listen. 

Then I considered writing him a letter but quickly realized that the absence of a corporate letterhead would immediately relegate my correspondence to the shredder. 

But the Conservative government’s latest move certainly deserves kudos. Instead of just putting forward a budget – you know, the facts and figures related to how our tax dollars are to be dispersed and regulated – this crafty group of politicos have managed to cram everything but the kitchen sink into a single omnibus budget bill. 

Over 400 pages covering everything from pensions to fisheries were included to create an easily understood read to go with morning coffee. Such a smart move! It’s a great plan that would make even more sense if every piece of new federal legislation was gathered up annually, crammed into one elaborate document and voted on in a swift and expedient manner. 

Efficiency is the key. Parliament could meet for one day every year and pass a single piece of legislation. MPs would then be free of all responsibility and be able to travel the world at government expense while avoiding contact with those who voting them into office.  

This idea of holding up parliament with debates and suggesting that hearings should be open to the public is just so much nonsense. Get on with it! Who cares what David Suzuki and groups like Sierra Club Canada think? Really, what do those people know? 

The concept of worrying about the environmental mess already created is absurd as one cannot alter the past. And looking into the future is equally bizarre as the next generations can fend for themselves. Further, the world might end tomorrow while there is profit to be made today. Why, for instance, would anyone worry about visiting the polar ice cap in the absence of five-star hotels? Let it melt! 

On the subject of melting ice it is good to see that the federal budget, Bill C-38, finally repeals the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act. At last there is an end to any formal commitment Canada has to this absurd gas emissions treaty. If the hundreds of tree-hugging scientist are correct our winters will be warmer. Frankly, Muskoka winters are much too cold and could use a good dose of warm air.  

And thanks to the Tories we find blabbermouth federal scientists have been asked to button their lips. In keeping with the tradition of leaders such as Harper and Clement the truth shall not out, rather filtered through a fine political mesh. After all, highly educated civil servants work for the public at public expense and it would be very wrong if they revealed the results of their research and studies let alone offered an opinion. Obviously, those experts are trying to confuse the public with the truth – an unacceptable activity. 

It’s very heartening to see that the Harper government is moving away from environmental studies that may be duplicated at the provincial level. A regional assessment has, for obvious reasons, been deemed sufficient. Even David Suzuki should know that pipelines and pollution in air and water cannot possibly cross provincial borders. 

The federal budget legislation is absolutely “on the right track” (recognize that phrase?) It mentions the “environment” 74 times. Phrases such as “Canada’s business environment,” “secure the low-tax environment,” and “an environment in which companies can plan ahead, positioning themselves to compete for defence contracts” are sprinkled throughout. Environmentalists should stop whining. They are obviously getting an abundance of attention.  

Some, poorly informed organizations such as the Environmental Law Association claim the Harper government’s budget contains vague and unacceptable proposals which are likely to significantly weaken Canada’s environmental laws. Obviously, these do-gooders are thinking about the next generations of Canadians and have lost sight of the profits that can be made today. They just don’t get it. 

Lastly, Clement deserves special praise as Muskoka’s federal representative. He must be applauded for recognizing that environmental considerations in Muskoka are not a priority. 

The robot affair: Peering into the future

By: Robert C. Henry

History has been described as a fable oft-repeated. As such, allow me to create the fable about a country called Canuckal even before it happens.  

It’s the spring of 2016 and the Canuckal Corporate Buttress Party (CCBP) under the leadership of Prime Minister Mie Way was once again in power following the federal election of late 2015. 

It was a narrow victory for Way and his party with three ridings where less than ten votes separated the winners – in this case the CCBP – from the losers. The House of Commons count was also very close. The CCBP held a slim majority of just two seats. 

Since 2012 the CCBP had been dogged by what was dubbed by the media as the “robot affair” which, incidentally, had nothing to do with an unethical, interpersonal relationship involving a robot. 

It was alleged that automatic phone calls were made to thousands of voters. Apparently, these automated calls made by robots that wrongly informed voters of changes to locations where they could vote and, further, the calls were identified as coming from Elections Canuckal. Obviously, if these allegations were true then somewhere along the line a crime had been perpetrated. 

When the allegations first surfaced in early 2012 they were dismissed by Way and his party as little more than a smear campaign. But the evidence of wrongdoing continued to pour in. 

Now Way, the canny politician that he was, felt that an investigation by the Canuckal Motorized Police (CMP) and the Election Commissioner would be sufficient to take the pressure off the CCBP. 

He steadfastly refused to order a judicial inquiry into the robot affair. Predictably, both the CMP and Elections Canuckal spent years investigating the allegations and failed to come up with any definitive answers.  

The CCBP basked in the questionable conclusions of these so-called investigations and continued to rant about a smear campaign by the opposition parties. 

It was a strange election in 2015 and much of that strangeness was driven by the coincidental election of Dick Sanatorium as president of the United States. 

Sanatorium had declared that Canuckal was part of the “axis of evil” based on the fact that the “godless” Canuckals embraced government-run health care. He was further upset by the fact many Canuckals took an anti-theist approach to organized religion and overwhelmingly supported women’s right to control their own bodies. 

During the 2015 election Way’s party tried to demonstrate that it was fully supportive of Sanatorium’s concerns and moved to quickly change the Canuckal national anthem to a rendition of “Glory, Glory Halleluiah” – a move that divided Canuckals into two opposing camps of believers versus non-believers. 

But, despite the 2015 election win, the robot affair remained unresolved.  

Then, mysteriously, in late 2016 some hand-written notes and letters signed by Way were leaked to the media. Those letters clearly indicated that the PM and many of his senior advisors and cabinet ministers had initiated, encourage and paid for the infamous robot calls. The 2015 election was no exception with a preponderance of robot calls made in closely contested ridings. 

Way and all those connected to the CCBP vehemently denied the authenticity of the letters. Their objections were ignored. However, the evidence was overwhelming and eventually, following a huge public outcry, criminal charges were laid. 

Subsequently, Way, 20 cabinet ministers, a consulting firm executive from the West coast along with a number of corporate leaders were found guilty. All were sentenced to ten years in prison with no hope of parole. 

The irony is that the courts were bound by legislation passed by the CCBP that had set minimums on all criminal sentences. The court had no option. Parole, house arrest or token sentences were not permitted under the new laws. 

Further, in an attempt to take political heat off the robot affair, the CCBP had changed the law by increasing the sentences for anyone convicted of tampering with or illegally influencing the outcome of an election. 

Way went to a federal penitentiary, and, ironically found himself quadruple bunked in a cell originally designed for just one inmate. The minimum sentence laws his party had put in place had increased the population of Canuckal prisons by over threefold – virtually overwhelming the country’s prison system. 

The CCBP disintegrated and Way went the way of any other common criminal. 

Oh yes, in 2017 Dick Sanatorium declared war on Canuckal in the name of God while  vehemently denying that his country’s shortage of oil and fresh water had influenced his decision. 

Former District Councillor Blames the Victims

 By: Robert C. Henry 

Contrary to Jim Boyes’ angry vitriol in last week’s Bracebridge Examiner the dilemma of Canada’s First Nations cannot be solved by blaming the victims. 

In referring to the citizens of Attawapiskat he claims, with apparent condescension, that tax dollars have been “wasted by and on these people:” These people?  What does he mean by that? 

Boyes rails against what he sees as corrupt leadership, irresponsible spending, self-destructive behaviour, vandalism and chronic mismanagement on the part of First Nation’s leaders and band members. 

As for poor allocation of resources one only has to look at the incredible duplication of municipal services the citizens of Muskoka continue to pay for. Boyes was part of that political system. Question: Did he ever try to reform that system? 

I take it that Boyes has visited Attawapiskat and other northern communities given the fact he is convinced there’s “very few living in tents” and that media pictures don’t tell the complete story. Of course, he knows that off to the left and right of these pictures are well laid out subdivisions with manicured lawns and twinkling Christmas lights. 

Let’s discuss Boyes’ issue of money spent without oversight. Yes, some of the financial problem stem from mismanagement by the chiefs and councils charged with dispensing federal funds on their reserves. 

However, chronic underfunding from Ottawa also accounts for much of the problem. 

Ottawa has added 2,000 bureaucrats to Indian and Northern Affairs over the past 15 years. It is this country’s fifth largest bureaucracy. With over 5,000 employees it has failed to better the lives of 430,000 status Indians on reserves. 

The fact is the gap between well-being on reserves and in the rest of Canada has been growing since 1996. Indian Affairs researchers have developed a “Community Well-Being Index.” It is a spreadsheet that gives every community, native and non-native alike, scores on education, employment, income and housing. 

Among the bottom 100 communities on that list, 96 are First Nations. 

Indian Affairs has placed close to 80,000 status Indians under third-party management – a controversial tactic involving a small army of for-profit private consultants and accounting firms. 

But there is an unsolved mystery. Each of these northern communities is required to file an average of 160 reports to the government each year. How, it must be asked, with such close monitoring, does a bureaucracy of 5,000 fail to identify the problems before they reach crisis proportions? 

Boyes never mentioned the fact that the causes of the mismanagement and lack of oversight can, in many cases, be traced back to the Indian Act, passed by Parliament in October, 1876. That piece of legislation remains more or less intact 135 years later and continues to be a barrier to real improvement in Indian’s standard of living. 

Former Deputy Minister of Indian Affairs, Harry Swain, addressed the issue with the following statement: “No politician ever got his or her bread buttered by taking on the Indian issue.” 

Then there’s the much-heralded but oft-forgotten 1996 Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. It’s a 4,000 page document on Canada’s systemic mistreatment of its native peoples. It concludes: “the main policy direction, pursued for more than 150 years, first by colonial then by Canadian governments, has been wrong.” 

The report’s plea for action has remained largely unanswered. 

Hopefully Boyes has spent some time reading up on the history of residential schools in Canada. Residential school attendance was imposed for more than 150 years – six generations of children. The last of these child prisons closed in 1996. Parents faced criminal sanctions if they refused to enrol their children in those schools. 

In total, 150,000 children were taken away from their families for years at a time and often for their entire childhoods. Tens of thousands endured years of severe trauma from loneliness and sickness, but also from being physically, sexually and psychologically brutalized by those entrusted with their care. 

Boyes should seriously contemplate the consequences if something equally horrendous occurred in his Muskoka back yard. Would it not lead to a community of walking wounded?  

The former District Councillor has shown a complete, utter misunderstanding of the reality that exists in many northern Canadian communities. 

For example, the Canadian Association of Foodbanks states that six apples and four small bottles of juice costs $23.50 in Attawapiskat.  

Of course, “these people,” should bear full responsibility for paying those prices.

PM Needs Week in Attawapiskat for ‘Attitude Adjustment’

By: Robert C. Henry 

Living in Muskoka does not exclude us from the shame of Attawapiskat. 

For this old, one-time helicopter pilot, it has been at least 30 years since I stayed in Attawapiskat and judging by the media pictures and extensive descriptions of that small community near the western shores of James Bay little has changed. In fact, I sense it’s worse now than during my stay of years gone by. 

Do not for a moment think that the situation in that small community is unique. Yes, it’s isolated, but only in a geographic sense. I’ve witnessed the truth and Attawapiskat is mirrored across Canada’s north. 

But we live in Muskoka. Why should we care? We should care because many of our fellow Canadians are living is third world conditions. We should care because it is our country that has been branded – internationally – as a nation that doesn’t appear to care a whit about the descendants of those who lost their land to the Europeans. 

And branding happens with or without intent. For example: During the G8 debacle Prime Minister Harper and MP Tony Clement were obviously hoping to brand Canada as a pleasant country of pristine lakes, beautiful scenery and smiling politicians. 

Instead, the world saw chaos in the streets of Toronto characterized by hundreds of unjustified arrests and police excesses. And yes, there were more than just a few idiots who deserved jail time. 

Gazebos and community washrooms got more publicity than policy statements and an artificial lake in Toronto garnered more attention than the real lakes of Muskoka. 

During this exercise the Canadian government doled out millions of dollars to “polish” Muskoka for the world to see. No such ‘polish” has been applied to northern, native communities. 

Over the years successive Liberals and Conservative federal governments have initiated and practiced policies of suppression, bureaucratic bungling, apartheid, exploitation, indifference and out and out cruelty when it comes to Canada’s native population. Please, don’t get me started on the shame of residential schools. 

The ruling parties have been fully aware of the conditions in places like Attawapiskat. Pleading ignorance simply doesn’t wash; in fact, it’s a transparent display of cowardice. 

Very young children often think they have disappeared when they cover their eyes. Our federal and provincial politicos have regularly covered their eyes to the plight of native people, but the problems and the suffering has not disappeared. 

And the first material response to this crisis came from the Canadian Red Cross, an organization that traditionally reacts to Third World disasters. But this isn’t an earthquake, war, flood or drought. It’s Attawapiskat in “our home and native land.” Oh Canada! 

In response to the negative “branding” of both Canada and its own government, the Harper Conservatives have come forth with a brilliant assessment of the situation. 

John Duncan, the federal minister of aboriginal affairs and northern development has determined that “urgent health and safety issues demand immediate action.” How many years have passed during which Attawapiskat required “immediate action?”  

Duncan has also requested a “comprehensive” audit to identify how money has been spent. Yes, bean counters to the rescue while children sleep in tents. Obviously, numbers need to be crunched and re-crunched but the immediate issue is human suffering.  

And if systematic mismanagement or gross incompetence is uncovered it should be dealt with but only after the children of Attawapiskat have warm beds, clean water and something other than slop buckets for toilets. And no, I haven’t missed the fact that Chief Theresa Spence doesn’t look like she’s suffering and certainly doesn’t appear as if she sleeps in a tent. 

If a solution is to be found it will come from a more personalized awareness. Our parliamentary leaders must, it seems, plunge their hands into the boiling water to determine that it’s hot. 

Cabinet ministers and the PM must personally acquaint themselves with the conditions that have prompted the Red Cross into emergency mode. 

I would humbly suggest that Defence Minister Peter Mackay be approached for the use of a CH-149 Cormorant helicopter for a flight to Attawapiskat. As part of a “training exercise” the aircraft could be loaded up with the PM and a group of cabinet ministers including Clement. 

Each would be issued a summer sleeping bag, a slop bucket for personal necessities and a ten pound bag of dried fish to stave off starvation. 

A one-week stay in Attawapiskat should lead to an attitude adjustment and even the emergence of some long overdue political courage.

Muskoka Ordered Pork and Bull

Muskoka got the serving of pork and bull it ordered. Tony Clement and Stephen Harper have won a repeat performance. 

Now that the Tories have a majority it will not surprise anyone to witness 167 penguins leaping to their feet in the House of Commons to support whatever Prime Minister Harper decides on. Debate, discussion and dissent will not be tolerated on pain of expulsion from the exclusive blue club. 

Predictably, Canada will have a fleet of fighter jets of dubious usefulness; Canada will not make any serious effort to slow the progress of global warming; the middle class will get kicked in the wallet while slowly disappearing; the rich will get richer; corporations will pay minimum taxes; and, pork barrel politics will be the order of the day. But we cannot forget the first course of bull was served up when the election campaign began. Be prepared, there’s more bull to come. 

Expect NDP leader Jack Layton to be the target of the nastiest, home-grown attack ads this country has ever seen. Perhaps the Tories will hire some media guru with a Tea Bagger resume to add some real spit, polish and venom to its smear campaign. 

And there are lessons for the other parties that came from this election. If, like Elizabeth May, your theme song is the environment, expect the mainstream media to ignore you. If you have an Ignatieff-like academic record (many times superior to the Prime Minister’s) you can expect your qualifications to be portrayed as a negative. 

In the riding of Muskoka-Parry Sound it boiled down to the two front-runners – Wendy Wilson (NDP) and Tony Clement (CON). Clement is a lawyer with a BA in political science. Wilson is a medical doctor with significant international experience from Antarctica to the NWT including Africa. 

As lopsided as that sounds in Wilson’s favour there is no way she could spend taxpayer’s dollars like Clement did on the G8/G20 silliness. However, one could safely bet a gold stethoscope that Wilson probably would have spent the G8/G20 billion on training doctors and reducing Canada’s infant mortality rate. 

She might even, in a moment of total abandon, throw some millions at education. God only knows where she would toss $35 billion if the fighter jet deal is scrapped. 

But we have what we have and although history is “but a fable agreed upon” (Napoleon) we must deal with the present as it exists. However, that doesn’t mean we should not look to the future. 

Monday’s vote saw the Conservative Party increase its vote percentage by less than two points and this allowed them to win 24 more seats than in 2008. 

According to Fair Vote Canada if the seats were won in proportion to the votes that were cast the final numbers would be as follows: CON 122, NDP 95, LIB 59, BQ 19, and GREEN 13. 

The question is: Would the main-stream media treat a movement that pushed for electoral reform the same way it treated Elizabeth May’s attempts to put the environment front and centre? 

A good bet! Where is that gold stethoscope? 

Robert C. Henry

Inquiry Into G8 Pork Barrel Politics Required

Without question Muskoka is now on the map, known not as a G8 host and international tourist destination but as the pork barrel capital of Canada.

The term pork barrel refers to appropriation of government spending for localized projects secured solely or primarily to bring money to a representative’s district.

A leaked draft report authored by Canada’s Auditor-General Sheila Fraser is reported to show that $50-million was lavishly sprinkled throughout Industry Minister Tony Clement’s Parry Sound-Muskoka riding. The shock is that these funds may have been used illegally.

There is no surprise in cottage country that millions was spent on downtown improvements, public toilets, a gazebo, sidewalk upgrades and parkland improvements most of which was miles away from the actual conference site.

Muskoka residents are well aware of the spending spree but must be surprised to learn that Fraser’s draft report indicates a local “G8 summit liaison and implementation team” composed of Clement, Huntsville mayor Claude Doughty and a manager of Deerhurst Resort was responsible for choosing 32 projects to receive funding.

Shortly after these revelations Conservative candidate John Baird said that the final decision for which projects received money came from infrastructure Canada. As transport minister in Stephen Harper’s government Baird was responsible for this government branch. Time will tell if Baird simply decided to fall on his sword or Fraser will reverse her draft message. 

The auditor-general’s draft report apparently shows the $50-million came from an $83-million Border Infrastructure Fund. The money, it appears, was never approved by Parliament for G8 infrastructure projects such as public washroom.

The report by Fraser is in draft form and the Tories are saying the final version will   paint a clearer picture with the nastier revelations purged.

Unfortunately, there seems to be an almost a casual acceptance of pork barrel politics in Muskoka. Even a local newspaper appears to endorse this practice. In a January 14, 2011 issue the following was said:  “We only have to look to the federal level to see the kind of opportunities that are possible with a member sitting on the government side of the House.

Whether you are one of his fans or not, MP Tony Clement has opened incredible doors for this riding.  Last year alone, he facilitated the arrival of the G8 Summit. He’s also worked to flow millions of dollars into this area for infrastructure improvements. His political connections have, without question, been a tremendous asset.” 

It does not appear that Fraser’s final report on G8 spending will be made public prior to the federal election. In this regard both Harper and Clement may have dodged a bullet. Obviously, a public inquiry is desperately needed. 

Hopefully, Fraser will eventually provide a definitive answer to the “who done it” question. However, it is reasonable to assume there will be many outstanding concerns that still must be addressed. A full reckoning of all the financial transactions related to the G8 Summit need to be publicly vetted.

Clement claims there was much consultation with at least some of Muskoka’s 51 municipal politicians. The public should know who these politicians were and what they agreed to or demanded.

The cost of each and every project needs to be clearly spelled out and the process of awarding the contracts for this work must be carefully reviewed.  

Any relationship – no matter how obscure – between those who made the final decision and those who received the contracts must also be revealed for public scrutiny.  

Overall transparency is a required as the $50-million was public money that some, like Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff, insist was spent illegally.

Given the serious nature of the allegations no stone should be left unturned.

Robert C. Henry