Or how about: If’n ya didn’t do nuthin’, what’d ya sweatin’ over?
Or how about Steve’s and Johnnie’s own words:
“We promised to stand up for accountability and to change the way government works,” said Prime Minister Stephen Harper. “Canadians elected this government to deliver on that commitment and today the Federal Accountability Act has received Royal Assent. From this day on, accountability in government is the law and we can all be proud of that fact.”
John Baird: “The Federal Accountability Act is a significant and substantive step by Canada’s New Government to help restore Canadians’ trust in government and the democratic process.”
Sure, but that was when Canadians were lead to believe that legislation applied to all Canadians. Stevie has informed us that such is not reality.
That might explain why Baird thumbed his nose at his and his master’s promise of transparency and accountability by refusing the legitimate demand of the Information, Privacy and Ethics committee for the electronic correspondence of a political aide who – can anyone make this shit up? - blocked the release of an Access to Information request.
Mr. Baird defended the decision, saying cabinet ministers, and not their staff, are responsible to Parliament (and that) parliamentary and constitution convention dictates that the political communications related to decisions and actions of cabinet ministers are never disclosed.
What a fucking troll.
Togneri apparently wrote a series of e-mails relating to this. Since Paradis as Minister is responsible to Parliament, any e-mails Togneri sent to him as Minister should be available for scrutiny.
As for e-mails to public servants within the department, Stevie and Johnnie passed through that nifty accountability act in December, 2006 giving us clear direction on that.
The accounting officer system was put into place in Canada after considerable debate about whether the traditional model of ministerial and public service accountability was satisfactory. The adoption of the accounting officer system could clarify accountability and improve the dialogue between Parliament and the professional public service by specifying that deputy ministers are indeed accountable for a few select areas, such as ensuring that an effective system of internal control is in place and signing the accounts of their organization. It may make deputy ministers devote more attention to their management responsibilities, and may provide deputy ministers with an incentive to say no to inappropriate political interference in departmental administration. It could do this by making them aware that their actions could potentially be the subject of parliamentary inquiry.
And public servants are accountable to their supervisors, so through the deputy minister, are responsible to Parliament as well.
So any e-mails Togneri sent to public servants within the department should be available to the committee as well.
Basic common sense tells us as well that parliamentary staff are responsible to their superior, and ultimately, the elected member they work for. Because of that, their e-mails sent in course of their job are no longer their own property, but belong to the transaction or issue which is managed by the elected member. The staffer doesn’t own the e-mails. So, Baird can dance around all he wants trying to please his portly master, but if he keeps to that line, it isn’t Togneri who is in contempt by refusing, it is Paradis.
By Baird’s account, Togneri is not really responsible for whatever action was taken. He was simply the post man, and the post man doesn’t own the mail he delivers nor can he grant that mail some vague diplomatic-type immunity.
So Baird, Harper, quit trying to interfere with the legitimate demand of the legitimate Information, Privacy and Ethics committee. Because - ‘Such interference would be unprecedented and abusive!’
(But hardly unprecedented coming from the Hamper party of Canada)
No comments:
Post a Comment