Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Thursday, May 09, 2013

Ethics commissioner rejects probe of Penashue conflict

OTTAWA — Canada’s conflict of interest and ethics commissioner says she won’t investigate complaints about how the federal byelection in Labrador was called.

Green party leader Elizabeth May had asked the commissioner to examine whether Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s actions amount to a conflict of interest.

A similar complaint was filed by accountability group Democracy Watch.

May asked why former Labrador MP Peter Penashue was allowed to make a $1.4-million spending announcement in Labrador four days before he resigned over illegal campaign donations.

May also asked whether Harper was advancing Penashue’s personal interests by allowing him to run before prosecutors have decided whether to lay charges.

Penashue blamed mistakes made by his former official agent and is running for re-election in a byelection Monday.

Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson says May’s request did not set out reasonable grounds to believe the Conflict of Interest Act was contravened.

She says actions to improve a candidate’s election prospects don’t necessarily advance private interests.

Dawson also says the fact that Harper and Penashue were cabinet colleagues does not show they were friends as defined under the Act.

Original Article
Source: canada.com
Author: The Canadian Press

No comments:

Post a Comment