Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

The honourable member for Simcoe-Grey has a question

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, June 3, 2010 4:16pm - 73 Comments

The last query posed in QP this afternoon.

Hon. Helena Guergis (Simcoe—Grey, Ind. Cons.): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister told Canadians he was aware of serious criminal allegations against me and he called in the RCMP. His chief of staff, Guy Giorno, wrote a letter to the Ethics Commissioner outlining these specific allegations. The ethics office spoke with Derek Snowdy and read him the letter. He denied having said these things. Snowdy testified under oath before a committee that he provided no information about any illegal or inappropriate actions on my part and called the party lawyer to complain about this misrepresentation. If the Prime Minister is so confident that the party lawyer outlined these allegations to me, will he table this letter in the House?

Hon. John Baird (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the government has forwarded the serious allegations to the relevant independent authorities and to the member. We will let those independent authorities do their work.

Tags: Helena Guergis, house of commons, John Baird, Parliament, Question Period

More by Aaron Wherry

http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

The culture of deceit strikes again.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Tceh Tceh

Is Guergis the only one who doesn't realize she is politically done? As much as I enjoy the Guergis-Jaffer Ex-Con Power Couple Circus(TM) even she must realize once Harper makes a decision nothing on heaven and earth will allow him to reverse. He just isn't wired that way. But by all means get mad and stamp your feet Helena. It's what you do best!

http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

I would guess that Guergis is completely aware that her political career is done. However, there is a danger in putting people in a position where they have nothing left to lose.

http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

Don't think she has that much spunk.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

What? The only thing she has is spunk! Now I suppose we have to define the word "spunk".

Oh. Oh, I see. See, I was using it in the informal, "spirit, pluck" or my own interpretation, "nerve" (as in, you've got a lot of nerve).

You, perhaps, were using the vulgar slang?
http://www.answers.com/topic/spunk

http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

She might harbour resentment but I don't think she has enough initiative to hurt the Harper government in any meaningful way. What Conservative backbencher or minister has ever really mouthed any original thought?

Sent from my iPod
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Ah, but you are confusing a well-developed ambition with lack of initiative. You can't get ahead in Harper's Conservative party by showing any initiative. She wanted to get ahead. Now that that's not gonna happen, she is free to express her initiative.

And I think Helena has proven to be something of a pitbull when she feels she hasn't had a fair shake. So not letting it go is very much in Helena's nature and should have been expected, I would think.
http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

I would prefer to judge a persons future actions by their history not a fantasy.

Sent from my iPod
http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

Doug's got an iPod!
http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

ooooooh! not aaaaaah!
The Real Jan

I think you underestimate her – she has an exaggerated sense of her talent. Reminds me of Sarah Palin. There's something about those low level beauty contests that seems to produce these types. I'm sure she's got lots of little tales tl tell about dear leader.
http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

It'll be surprise if she does anything other than act out of self-interest. I'm sure she has tales to tell but she's been so effectively marginalized they'll slide right off Mr Teflon.

Sent from my iPod
Patchouli

I actually hope you're wrong because I've been thinking it might be fun to hear Helena sing. And by pushing her so far away, harper has ensured she can reach the high notes because she will have nothing to lose.

Sing Helena sing!
http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

I'd like nothing better :-)

But I don't think she rally wants to do anything but polish her self-image till its squeaky clean
The Real Jan

One doesn;t preclude the other.
http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

You're playing Hopeful Zen Chess.

E.B.

Surely, you don't begrudge her that right?

It has been suggested that Mr. Harper has a temper and has been known to express it. I don't see why Ms. Guergis should not be allowed to do so.

(However, I really don't see anything in her question that suggests she is stamping her feet.)
http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

Politically done for sure. But I think it's fair enough for her to try to clear up an allegation of criminal behaviour if it has not basis.

Lord Kitchener's Own

The Prime Minister's Director of Communications will be right back with an answer to your questions. He's just hiding from a bailiff at the moment.

ahm

In Paris, if Twitter is to be believed. (but can you imagine the hilarity if the bailiff showed up to serve him there?!!)

Lord Kitchener's Own

That would be funny.

Of course, it also makes one wonder, if the guy's in Paris then why would the Tories bother barring the bailiff from entering the building to serve him? Wouldn't "He's in France, but you're free to come in and look around if you'd like" been a more appropriate (and less infuriating) response to a bailiff who's attempting to serve a legal summons?
Expat Canadian

Fax it to me! I'm sure Dimitri is somewhere near Pigalle…

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

now that is funny.

http://intensedebate.com/people/LynnTO LynnTO

As an independent, she should relish her opportunity to properly represent the constituents who elected her and quit thinking that bringing up her expulsion from the Conservative caucus and RCMP investigation into her and her husband's dealings will actually help her cause.

http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Why should she be any different from the Tory caucus? She was trained well it seems

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned…

http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

I'm not so sure this even qualifies as fury. Seems like a pretty even-toned, reasonable and legitimate question to me.

She begrudgingly apologized for the airport incident. She begrudgingly resigned for… who knows why, even she doesn't tell us why she decided to resign. She deserves her lumps for all leading up to that.

But beyond that we have bizarre, unexplained, possibly deceitful, likely vindictive behaviour from Harper and the PMO. She has a pretty legitimate question: what are the "serious and credible allegations"?

I think it is a fundamental principle of justice in this country that those who stand accused are entitled to know what are the allegations against them so that they can defend themselves or take corrective action. Harper and Baird and the Conservatives don't think that principle applies to them. This is our government.

Mike T.

If it were actualy court I would be in complete and horrified, kafkaesque agreement.

since it's only sitting in gov't, I am merely in very very strong agreement.
ahm

It's a fundamental principle of justice that applies to criminal justice, specifically when the Crown charges a person with a crime. In some limited circumstances, a person may allege a crime and the alleged offender is not entitled to know or take corrective action. (Heck, what with security certificates and accusations of crimes committed against the State vis-a-vis anti-terrorist laws, sometimes that doesn't even apply to the accused)

http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

Well it goes beyond just criminal matters.

More to the point, I speak of justice in the specific sense – consider the limitations on false accusations supported by defamation laws for example and the difference between having a reputation as an incompetent because of your own public actions vs having a reputation as a possible law breaker because of Harper's unsubstantiated allegations – and in the general sense – it is just not a decent way to deal with people no matter what they have done.

ahm

The point I have failed to make, I think, is that as a fundamental principle of justice, the right to face your accuser and to defend yourself is one developed in response to the power of the State to arrest, charge, try, and punish; the principle as applied to other areas of justice derives from that. I am not quibbling with you, merely attempting to add to your statement. I know from my work in the provincial justice system that that right is not always guaranteed. It's a tricky thing, law and justice. As a lay person, I try to follow it as best I can, and usually I am bewildered.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

The point I was making is that Guergis, to her credit, didn't curl up in a corner and die. She's fighting back, something that Harper and a great many others probably didn't expect her to do.

I hope she keeps it up. I have a feeling that Harper's actions towards this woman are going to come back and haunt him.

Thwim

Hm. Perhaps my suggestion to have her move a point of order in order to put off all business until the Prima Facie motion before parliament is dealt with wasn't so far-fetched after all.

http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

Now THAT would be interesting.

http://intensedebate.com/people/tedbetts tedbetts

I got that. I've just seen a few commenters make reference to this as being some sort of vengeful acting out and my point was just how reasonable an action it is that she is taking.

If I were Harper, I would get those claims to her. She seems bent on protecting her reputation and the only other place to go from here after doing news interviews and asking the question in Parliament is to launch a defamation claim.

That be bad publicity for him and hits all of the bad notes: lack of accountability, culture of deceit, vindictiveness, etc. Also, she would be entitled to discoveries and would get the information anyway so you always look better voluntarily giving up something that someone can force you to give.

The Real Jan

Harper is not in the habit of giving anything up voluntarly.
danby

always look better voluntarily giving up something that someone can force you to give

like the un-redacted Afghanistan reports?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

Baird stated that the specific allegations have been forwarded to the member. I have sorta stopped following this, but I recall that Guergis said Harper refused to tell her the allegations against her.

Lord Kitchener's Own

So, I'm faced with deciding whether I think Baird is lying or Guergis is!?!?

I think I need to lie down.

Anon 001

Meow!

Lord Kitchener's Own

Really?

The Prime Minister went on national television and told the whole country that he had passed on serious allegations against this woman to our national police force, but he refuses to tell anyone what those allegations were, including the person who's had something alleged against her.

You think it's "catty" for her to be frustrated by this state of affairs, and to ask that she be told what she's been accused of? 'Cause I'd say it's a natural reaction, and should have been entirely expected.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose Janice Rose

A few months back, I would never have thought I could sympathize with Helena Guergis; but she is showing some respectability, especially in the face of Harper's lack of transparency and decency to let her know why he has expelled her.

Mike T.

She's still not great, she just looks really really good next to Harper.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose Janice Rose

LOL – That's what it is! Thanks for putting this into perspective Mike.

wellwell

Give her a break. It's entirely possible that she was never told or shown the allegations against her. Innuendo is not sufficient cause for her to lose everything.

And by the way, the "hell hath not fury" line is pretty sexist in this context. I practically choked when Tom Clark used it to dismiss Guergis' question a couple of minutes ago on Power Play. What a total fraud he is as a journalist. At least Mike Duffy was too lazy to hide his Conservative leanings.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Thank you for that. I felt the same way. Although I normally quite like Tom Clark.

Gary

I don't know.
I'm QUITE certain that at my place of work, I would be turfed if I let MY spouse do the things Rahim was allowed to do in my office, with the toys my company gave ME to use!
How about you guys/gals, is your place of work so lax that anything goes? Come on now, be honest!

danby

Fair enough, but:
the Prime Minister told Canadians he was aware of serious criminal allegations against me and he called in the RCMP. His chief of staff, Guy Giorno, wrote a letter to the Ethics Commissioner outlining these specific allegations. The ethics office spoke with Derek Snowdy and read him the letter. He denied having said these things. Snowdy testified under oath before a committee that he provided no information about any illegal or inappropriate actions on my part and called the party lawyer to complain about this misrepresentation.

Would that happen at your work or is it anything goes?

Gary

Yes, THE BOSS screwed up the process. But that still doesn't erase the fact that inappropriate behavior was allowed by Helena. I would still wager this would trump any hope for ME to hold onto my job in the same circumstances. What amuses me to no end, is all the clamouring for accountability by the likes of you people, when one comes along, instead of giving it the "Bronx Cheer" it so richly deserves, we are treated to the poor Helena garbage just hours after she was made out to be one half of the evil Bonnie and Clyde gang! That you people don't see your hypocrasy on display from the highest building says alot of your moral fibre!

http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

Gary, if your boss screwed up the process as it appears the PMO has in this case, you would either get your job back or a very nice check and possibly both.

JAG

Here is the Youtube link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSt4g_xR7YA&fe…
JAG

[youtube mSt4g_xR7YA&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSt4g_xR7YA&feature=player_embedded youtube]
chet

I stand here, as a representative of my riding to address a personal matter of one of my constituents….that constituent being me.

Unseemly, to say the least.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

I stand here, as a representative of my riding to address a personal matter of several of my constituents. These people voted for a member of Parliament who has been marginalized and made much less effective in advancing the concerns of all constituents, by way of unsubstantiated–and undefined–allegations of criminal behaviour. Will the government disclose the reasons why my constituents have lost the fully effective member of Parliament they duly voted in?

(Of course she can't say that because if she wants to run again she's just provided a definitive reason not to vote for her)

chet

And before she parted ways with Harper, ie became the enemy of your enemy, was she a poor misunderstood victim?

The reflexive anti-Harperism among the left in Canada has become comical. She's the evil Bonnie of Bonnie and clyde. The precise moment she's contra Harper, her entire persona instantaineously changes.

So many unseemly alliances the left has, can be explained by blind ideological partisanship, not the least of which is the perverse movement to turn Taliban monsters into poor innocent victims at the hands of the eeevil warmongers of the Canadian forces.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Chet, where did I say I'm a fan of Helena Geurgis? In fact, I'm not a fan of the entire family, being from there and my family having dealings with her family and all.

I think you are confusing my desire for justice–or even fairness in all things as best we can. Whether I like the "monsters" involved or not. I even slagged her slightly in my comment above, but of course you can't see grey, can you? Just stark black and white.

W.B.

Don't worry. PMO plant.

Dot

zzzzzzzz

If she wants to see the letter, simply ask the Ethics Commissioner for a copy, or file a FOI request for her personal records.

Then what Senator Ruth said.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose Janice Rose

FOI request? My understanding is that freedom doesn't really exist in practice Dot.

Dot

Well, it seems the Liberals or the NDP are free of ideas or uses for their alloted questions, so they wasted one on their new BFF. Nice coalition.

The Real Jan

There seems to be a bit of a glitch re FOI at the current time. Or so I've heard.

Lord Kitchener's Own

The people who normally handle the requests for the PMO are currently in hiding.

hosertohoosier

Innocent until proven guilty is fine enough for the courts, but it doesn't work in government. A minister that operates under a cloud of suspicion – with daily headlines making allegations – cannot do their job functionally. Perhaps it isn't fair to the minister (and it is a bit rich that many of the same folks who were chanting resign a few months ago are now lamenting this lack of fairness), but it is fair to the Canadian people that they have representatives that are able to do their jobs.

wellwell

She deserves an explanation after the fact. That's what she's seeking. Your post is pointless.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Indeed, and I don't think there's anybody even remotely suggesting that she should have remained in Cabinet. The problem, however, is that Mr. Harper has effectively slandered her.. although it's difficult to tell right now because he's not letting anybody know if he's telling the truth.
Lord Kitchener's Own

Which explains very well why it's OK to fire a cabinet minister before they've been convicted of whatever it is that they have been accused of.

It DOES NOT justify firing a cabinet minister without even telling her what you've accused her of.

http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

I don't like her anymore than anyone else, but she has rights like any other Canadian citicizen as far as I'm concerned – to know her accuror and the accusations.

Is Harper's reason so weak he's afraid to bring it forward?
W.B.

Some NDP spokesperson on Power and Politics claimed he was an expert on writing questions and he trashed her and her question. This question was clear succinct and included all the necessary background info in the required time. Probably written by her lawyer. But where was that NDP guy coming from? Arm and arm with Kory T. Crazy.
Out There

The Conservatives made a tactical error when they evicted Guergis from the party. A more measured response would have been to "temporarily" relieve her of her cabinet post while any outstanding investigation is pending, but keep her in the party until the allegations had been proven true. Now, the PMO has nothing they can threaten her with.

I don't have a great deal of sympathy for Guergis, but she deserves to know exactly what she is being accused of. And she also deserves to be assumed innocent before being proven guilty; this is a standard principle of Canadian justice. At present, it looks as if the Conservatives threw her out of the party in a fit of pique, and tossed a few drive-by character smears in her direction, presuming that she would crawl away meekly.

It would be great political theatre if Guergis decided to run as an independent in the next election (though it would be foolish of her to do so). The Conservatives would throw everything they have at her.

Patchouli

I agree and suggest that once again, his treatment of her really calls into question that old chestnut that the prime minister plays chess while the rest play checkers. If he had left her in caucus, he would have continued to hold power over her, but now she's got very little to lose and no hope but to fight back.
wellwell

Stephen Harper doesn't handle conflict with women very well. Better to get rid of her entirely, from his point of view. Remember Belinda Stronach?

Patchouli

I think the master chess tactician thinks that by slinging mud but without specifics, he makes her look like she has zero integrity, and so no one will believe the allegations against him that she may bring forward some day. The reality is, however, that she is publicly asking for him to say what she did — and so she overcomes looking like a liar, and puts the heat on him.

James Wolfe

I always find it comical when you clowns in the media use the word honourable before talking about a politician. This expensive bad comedy that goes on daily on Parliament Hill and Queens Park is just a complete joke to any informed thinking citizen of Canada. We pay these clowns an awful lot of money to get a daily dose of spin, propaganda, scandal, Quebec nonsense, separatist nonsense…just a lot of blah, blah; blah…the public is sick and tired of the mess this country has become over the last 4 decades. Thanks Trudeau and all the clowns that have followed. The politicians and media alike have created this expensive brain-dead socialist cesspool and none of you have a clue how to correct it. A new party and system is the only way. Our BNA act served us well until Trudeau and his gang of traitors arrived. Now we are just ruled by a bunch of lost clowns running from one expensive scandal to the next, bankrupting the entire country in the process. Liberal, Tory same old story…What a joke, poor Canada.