(Agent of) Karma MacGregor

by kadyomalley on Wednesday, August 13, 2008 7:04am - 0 Comments

The official agent for a Conservative candidate in Toronto told The Canadian Press yesterday that he and other potential witnesses were told by an organizer for the federal party as late as Monday that they didn’t have to testify at the inquiry if they didn’t want to.

Douglas Lowry said the organizer, whom he named as Carmen McGregor, gave the advice after he and others received summonses from the Commons ethics committee.

“We’ve all been told,” Mr. Lowry said.

[...]

He said he and the other Conservatives were given the advice Monday, adding that Ms. McGregor said it in her capacity as a party official.

“She said it, but she’s from the party. She would contact whoever the executive director is.”

Conservative MP Dean Del Maestro confirmed the party has a Toronto regional organizer named McGregor, but said he believes her first name is Carma not Carmen. Party spokesman Ryan Sparrow did not respond to an e-mail asking for a comment or response from Ms. McGregor. {Tim Naumetz, Canadian Press]

Perhaps The Sparrow was thrown off by the fact that her name is actually Karma MacGregor – not “Carmen” or “Carma” (and many thanks to the reader who alerted ITQ to the name confusion).

Otherwise, he would certainly have had something to say about Lowry’s allegation that a Conservative organizer known as  “Finley’s GSA axe-woman”, according to a local Blogging Tory, was apparently offering somewhat dubious advice to at least one former candidate and future witness as recently as Monday (and whose more recent involvement in a hotly contested Mississauga nomination battle is chronicled here).

Or, if not him, perhaps Doug Finley could chat about this latest development when he appears before the committee at the appointed  – as opposed to  his self-appointed – hour later today. Because he is going to show up, right? I mean, otherwise, it might look as though he – and his party – have something to hide.

For fun: How would have the then-opposition Conservatives reacted if the Liberal Party had warned potential witnesses away from the Public Accounts committee during hearings on the sponsorship scandal?

Bookmark and Share
  • Paul Wells

    What I really love about the Conservatives is they’ve been so classy right through this whole thing. Just a consistent appeal to the highest ideals of good behaviour. I’m so proud of them!

  • http://deleted Sandi

    What happened to intelligence, dignity, statesmanship that we expect from our MP’s?

    Neat isn’t it to see Wallace chewing on a toothpick and sucking on his earphone and Tilson smirking and Del Mastro whining because he works hard and hasn’t taken a vacation (your choice Mr. Del Mastro). Or, Del Mastro saying he had to cancel meetings with his constituents? Duh – you’ve known about the hearing since June – why make appointments with constituents – and, who makes “appointments” with constituents anyway.

    I do hope that any visitors to Canada didn’t get to see this – how embarrassing.

  • SERENDIPPITTYDOODOO

    “What happened to intelligence, dignity, statesmanship that we expect from our MP’s?”

    It’s like a VISITATION from the Seven Deadly Sins. You’ve described what was before you extremely well.

  • Scott M.

    How would have the then-opposition Conservatives reacted if the Liberal Party had warned potential witnesses away from the Public Accounts committee during hearings on the sponsorship scandal?

    For an opposition party, the Conservatives were far more media savvy than the opposition Liberals. This would have been all over the news, they would have been calling into talk shows, etc.

  • Scott M.

    Of course the question is, when is the first opportunity for a report from the committee to be brought before the house so that they can ask for warrants to be issued? And will it be *before* third reading of the last-chance “poison pill” confidence legislation passed?

  • Just Visiting

    Scott M indicates some of the things that the CPC would have done had the roles been reversed.

    The other difference is that the Libs (as government under attack) would have countered the allegations of witness tampering using the old-school method: by explaining in detail what they had and had not done related to the witnesses.

    The CPC, in turn, would then have attacked the Libs explanation, demanded answers to a million other questions that hadn’t been raised, and eventually been able to shout “gotcha you Liberal liar” when the Liberals slipped up rhetorically on some factoid or other.

    - JV

  • http://caiti-online.blogspot.com/ Transcanada

    How would have the then-opposition Conservatives reacted if the Liberal Party had warned potential witnesses away from the Public Accounts committee during hearings on the sponsorship scandal?

    The CONs would have built another plank in their election platform and call it (I’m just throwing out ideas here) “accountability and transparency?!’ and Canadians who actually think these ideals are worthy would have swallowed it.

    “Its a real plan to clean up government, just not a CON government”

  • Deb Prothero

    Karma (as in cause and effect) is a bitch, isn’t it?

From Macleans