Month: September 2012

Pimpin’ Ain’t Easy

I note that Kai Nagata of “I’m-not-a-CTV-corporate-whore” fame has released a new video this morning on behalf of The Tyee and the Tides Foundation accusing Ezra Levant and Kathryn Marshall of “pimping” Canada out for money as it sells oil to the US and China.

Here it is:

Whatever you think of the video, Kai is being an activist for his organization, and he’s raising awareness for his arguments. The pimp charge is quite something, as Kai himself is “pimping” (by his own definition) for the interests on the other side of the development/environment debate.

Cue media “pimping” from Glen McGregor of the Ottawa Citizen who promotes the video:

McGregor, according to a deep Infomart search, has never written about the Tides Foundation and their connection to the Tyee.

Meanwhile, McGregor took interest in another video made by those “pimps” for smaller government over at the National Citizens Coalition:

He didn’t exactly gush over our video though. Instead, he went on the attack, focusing his attention on the messenger who would dare hold Bob Rae to account for his record (we didn’t call him a pimp or a ho — perhaps this was the problem?). McGregor wrote,

While there is amazing synchronicity between the NCC and the CPC, the notion that the Tories would fund a home-made YouTube clip does not compute, given that the NCC has no trouble raising money on its own.
 
During the spring election campaign, the NCC raised $168,960 in contributions to advertisements, according to its third-party advertising return filed with Elections Canada.
 
But the NCC appears to have held on to the bulk of this money for, uh, later use. The return shows the NCC spent only about 29 per cent of the money it took in. So, Election 41 was something of a cash bonanza for the NCC.

Now, I actually like Nagata and McGregor well enough personally. However, if advocacy is pimping… declare it up front.

Conservatives insist Liberals must ban scofflaw candidates

The Liberal Party of Canada has formally announced its rules for their upcoming leadership contest today. Yesterday, I was given a preview of what we should expect regarding the convention and voting while Jane Taber revealed some details regarding the Liberal Party’s rules on candidates and debt — a problem many of them faced during the 2006 leadership race.

I noted yesterday,

Also, regarding Hall-Finley’s debt and ability to accumulate future debt, I’m told that there’s no provision in law or by any Liberal rule that prevents her from seeking the Liberal leadership.

The Conservative Party disagrees with my Liberal source. They are calling on the Liberal Party to ban candidates that are in violation of the law. Here’s what they have communicated to reporters today,

It is outrageous that six years after their 2006 leadership campaign, four senior Liberals remain in violation of the law for refusing to pay back large donations disguised as loans.

After nearly six years of leniency from Elections Canada, the Ontario Superior Court ruled in July that these Liberals broke the law when they failed to repay their loans.

Liberals in violation of the law include sitting Member of Parliament Hedy Fry and rumoured leadership candidate Martha Hall Findlay.

If the Liberals are really serious about staying on the right side of the law this time, they will ban the candidacy of the four senior Liberals who have been in violation of the law these past six years.

The Liberal leadership show will span two weekends

I’ve learned that the upcoming leadership process will span two weekends instead of one. In contrast with the NDP process which selected Thomas Mulcair over one weekend in Toronto, Liberals will congregate for one convention weekend to hear candidate speeches and will vote and hear results during the subsequent weekend. According to the logic conveyed to me today, the Liberals want to avoid a situation whereby 80% of the party’s supporters have voted by the time any candidate has made their final pitch. The voting irregularities of the NDP contest only compounded the chaos of the limited time schedule of their leadership convention.

On the second weekend, the Liberal Party envisions that candidates may vote in the ridings of their choosing but will congregate at a centralized location for the announcement of results.

Also, regarding Hall-Finley’s debt and ability to accumulate future debt, I’m told that there’s no provision in law or by any Liberal rule that prevents her from seeking the Liberal leadership.

Regarding the money details, Jane Taber has some interesting information on how the upcoming federal Liberal leadership race will be governed.

In particular, a debt ceiling of $75,000 for candidates will be instituted to prevent a recurrence of previous troubles of leadership candidates still paying off debts now 6 years after the previous contested Liberal leadership election. Martha Hall Finley, is still grappling with more than $45,000 of debt from her ill-fated run for the Grit’s top job in 2006.