A couple of bloggers made the point "follow the money" both about Chalmers and the "De-Election" campaign... but I don't think the MSM is interested in looking at something which can't be spun into being a problem for the new Conservative government.

The pathetic part about this is the few journalists out here who are still flogging this dead horse of an issue. Isn't there anything else to talk about?

Posted by: Mac at April 2, 2006 07:54 PM

---

Some may not be aware but two persons were arrested after being caught vandalising Emersons' office several weeks ago. The MSM has shown absolutely no interest in who these people were and to whom they were connected to. Do any of you doubt for a minute that if it were a Liberal or NDP office on the receiving end of such an act that the MSM would be tripping over themselves trying to find a connection to the right wing!

Posted by: b stevenson at April 2, 2006 08:09 PM

---

Faint hope, Steve. The MSM is more likely to re-try the Gerda Munsinger affair, Airbus, or the CPR scandal.

Posted by: dmorris at April 2, 2006 08:10 PM

---

Is it truly as poor as all that? That a really interesting story that an enterprising reporter could "break" and make good copy, won't take the time to follow it up?

Keep kicking the cat Steve, it's a good point and hopefully the other main bloggers will post something on it. It'd be a good thing to have this type of possibly criminal behaviour exposed.

Thanks,
Pat

Posted by: Pat at April 2, 2006 08:16 PM

---

"The pathetic part about this is the few journalists out here who are still flogging this dead horse of an issue. Isn't there anything else to talk about?"

No Mac, there isn't anything else to talk about. Harper isn't giving them anything to talk about, good or bad. Nothing. Reporting "nothing happened today" isn't going to sell to the masses. Harper needs to give the MSM some news or they will start inventing the news. I can see the headlines now, "Conservatives still ducking Emmerson scandal." "Conservative wall of silence hiding secret agenda." "What are the Conservatives hiding from the public?" "Harper changes jacket at taxpayers expense."

It doesn't matter if the Conservatives are the best thing since sliced bread. The MSM can make them all out to be jack-boot wannabes and the non-discerning public (i.e. most people) will believe them. Larry Zolf wasn't kidding when he said that the MSM can destroy a leader. Just don't say anything good about him. Or put a bad spin on the good things. For example instead of saying "Harper repairs relations with U.S. neighbours" you say "Harper cozies up to Americans". "Harper pledges $200 million for infrastructure" becomes "Harper diverts child care funds". "Harper relocates troops near major cities" becomes "Harper positions troops near Liberal friendly ridings". Most people don't read any further than the headline.

I sure hope that PM Harper has a solid plan to deal with the media. They play hard ball and they cheat.

Posted by: jgriffin at April 2, 2006 08:41 PM

---

Emerson should show the personal integrity of character to realize he ran under a false banner, under false pretenses, and now represents the conservatives in that riding while it was the Liberals in that riding that put him in office.

He has the right, legally, to cross the floor, and God knows there are enough sleazy Liberal examples he can use to justify such an undemocratic and unethical stance. The whole reason the Liberals were turfed was because of their record of sleaze, so this hardly justifies the Conservatives using the Liberals to do the same.

To resolve this, Emerson should show some personal integrity by a) promising a by-election 18 mo. from now, and b)paying back the money he used from the Liberal riding to gain a Liberal position he then gave away to the Conservatives. This is just basic integrity as we would expect in any business practice, so why would we expect any less from politicians?

To refuse to set a by-election is to refuse the special circumstances Mr Emerson created by betraying local voters. It is symbolically necessary for him to show this token of respect for the Liberal intentions of those who voted for him. To refuse to pay back the money he took under Liberal pretenses, goes against the most basic principles of law. The contract said he was selling a Chevy, and he delivered a Ford. This does not stand up.

Whether politicians like it or not, their greatest asset is their integrity, not what they can legally get away with. Voters are not just an inconvenient mechanism to be used to gain power. Mr Emerson must make some effort to show the same integrity expected in business practice to make things right in this constituency.

Posted by: hoffman at April 3, 2006 11:43 AM

---

hoffman, you're all over the map here! Contrary to the basic principles of law? You must be joking! You said 'business practice' and 'integrity' in the same sentence. I hope that means you're not a Dipper and perhaps it's worth my time addressing your remarks...

Did David Emerson suddenly become someone else?

David Emerson is still David Emerson.
David Emerson campaigned as David Emerson.
David Emerson did fund raising as David Emerson.
David Emerson got elected as David Emerson.
David Emerson was 'selling' David Emerson and he delivered David Emerson as member of Parliament.

Yes, it was a shock when Emerson crossed the floor so soon after the election but there is nothing illegal, undemocratic, unethical or sleazy about crossing the floor. Emerson's crossing was less controversial than Stronach's and we saw how the Ethics Commissioner ruled on that one, right?

There is nothing to "resolve" here. Emerson raised much far more money for the Liberal Party than was spent on his election; this is a matter of public record. There is no justification for a by-election so why would Emerson propose one?

If this was a business and the voters were shareholders, Emerson just scored a coup by delivering far more than he promised since his position as a cabinet minister is a definite improvement over being a back-bencher for Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition.

Let's look at the "real" issues here without less histrionics, shall we?

The local Liberal riding association are upset because they had an "inside track" to the federal government with Emerson but, since he's crossed the floor, that track is derailed. Notice how the national party has become silent on this issue? Ask yourself why that would be?

The local and national Dippers are twisted up because they see BC and particularly Vancouver, as the region with the greatest opportunity for growth of their party. For them, this has nothing to do with Emerson (although they'd swallow their tongues before they'd admit it) but everything to do with getting another seat for their party.

The local Dippers are gonna keep pushing as long and hard as they can at this because it's good politics for them to do so. This kind of emotional issue appeals to their kind of voter.

There's even a few of the local Tory riding association who have their panties in a bunch because their candidate not only didn't succeed, they see him as having been supplanted by Emerson.

At the end of the day, Emerson has a difficult task ahead if he intends to be re-elected but that's his problem... and this remains a dead horse issue.

Posted by: Mac at April 3, 2006 02:55 PM

---

The list on the names of doners for loons, toons and fivers for the *Henderson call home* banner flypast seems to number 286 persons.

Emerson List = 286 names.
April 3/2006

Layton and the NDP are too obvious. Their campaign to get Emerson removed will give them another advantage in blackmailing the Conservatives, just as they so easily did to the liberals at a cost of $billions.

It's all about gaining power. They do not seem to give a damn about getting important things done that will make Government sronger and more accountable.

Henderson... stay strong... stay resolute.. keep your head down and do the job. We are depending on you not to blink! TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at April 3, 2006 06:58 PM

---

Send David Emerson an Email. I just pasted the above with a few words of support.

We want him to iron out the softwood tarriff thing etc.: Layton only wants to gain personal leverage. Strange, because it's his unionized workers who win when Emerson gets the job done.

emerson.d@parl.gc.ca

Let's counter some of the flak he's getting. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at April 3, 2006 07:34 PM

---

Sorry, seems Emerson and Hederson are interchangeable when my personal auto print is on. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at April 3, 2006 07:38 PM

---

Good idea, Tony. Thanks for posting the email.

Posted by: Mac at April 3, 2006 09:56 PM

---

One year later....

Captain Ed touches base with Gomery one year later..

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/006669.php

….and bloggers in Canada heap well deserved thank yous
upon the steady as you go Captain while mentioning Angry and SDA as well. TG

Posted by: TonyGuitar at April 4, 2006 02:00 PM

---

The ethical state of Canada's political culture is a value that is above partisan politics. As a conservative, the conservation of democratic ethics is a principle greater than particular partisan politics, because when we lose the ethical legitimacy of democratic governance, we edge closer to those states where, although a nominal democracy is in place, the political culture does not exist to fill it with meaningful process.

Emerson ran not just as Emerson, but as a Liberal. Funds were donated by people who thought this was going to the Liberal party. So this money needs to be paid by the Conservatives back to the Liberal Constituency which was robbed of the Liberal candidate they thought they had elected. As for the Conservative members of this same constituency, they should have a chance to elect a candidate to run as a Conservative, and this candidate may or may not be Emerson. That's how it works in a genuine democracy. It was also the Conservative candidate who got screwed by this 'claim-jumping'.

Having said that, I believe Emerson will be good for BC and Canada and I would support him as a Conservative candidate. But to be so, he must bow to democratic ethical legitimacy of process by a) returning the Liberal money (its not much, but its an important symbol) and b) running in a separate by-election as an act of contrition for treating our party-based representative democracy with such dismissive disrepsect. Just because the Liberals did the same UNETHICAL thing should be reason for Conservatives NOT TO DO IT. That's why the ran against the Liberals. That's why they received the public trust.

Can anyone tell me why the Conservative Party will not return this money raised by the Liberal Constituency? Can anyone tell me why the Conservative party will not call a by-election specific to this odd riding situation in order to provide ethical democratic legitimacy to a Minister of the Crown? Doing the right thing is easy; prevarication and equivocation is an unending process that resolves nothing and continues the tarnishing of Canadian democracy as was done for so long by the Liberal Party of Canada.

Posted by: hoffman at April 6, 2006 04:09 AM

---

Good investigative work Steve. I admit to being shocked when the Emerson floor crossing first appeared. But as a Conservative supporter and voter I convinced myself that it was good for the country. I didn't realize how strongly or perhaps determined those opposed were. After all, there was no outrage or street protests when Belinda Stronach crossed the floor. I have to believe that the NDP feel that they have a good chance of capturing this seat in a by-election or the next general election. Like others, I do not enjoy watching Ian Wadell encouraging the protests when we watched how he responded when his NDP government obtained the services of MLA Gordon Wilson, leader of the Progressive Democratic Alliance.

But with all of the talk of democratic reform the one thing that I want to hear but don't is for politicians to live in the ridings they serve as MP's. To me they could represent me better if they lived where I do. I know that Emerson doesn't live in his MP riding. But does Ujjal Dosanjh? Does Jack Layton? The historians among us know that after Tommy Douglas was defeated in Regina he move to Burnaby-Coquitlam, when he eventually lost that seat he went on to Nanaimo - Cowichan and the Islands. A voter, though, must live in the riding that he votes in. Somehow, this seems to favour the political class and not the citizens.

Lance M. Jefferson
Richmond, British Columbia

Posted by: Lance M. Jefferson at April 6, 2006 09:46 PM

---