Say what now? MacKay threatens to sue MPs who questioned veracity of his chopper tale

"Defence Minister Peter MacKay is considering legal action against MPs who accused him of lying about a ride he took aboard a search-and-rescue helicopter.

Opposition members have called for Mr. MacKay to apologize and even to resign over his use of military resources to shuttle him to the airport in Gander from a personal vacation at a remote Newfoundland fishing lodge.

Documents released last week showed some National Defence staff predicted the trip could be perceived badly, with one suggesting the pick-up was only to be under the “guise” of a search-and-rescue exercise. The cost of the flight has been estimated at $16,000.

Mr. MacKay has said the 30-minute trip was pre-planned and that he’d been waiting for the opportunity to check out the work of the search-and-rescue team in the region. He said his personal vacation was cut short by government business in London, Ont.

Some MPs, including Interim NDP Leader Nycole Turmel and Liberal MP Marc Garneau have said Mr. MacKay “lied” to the House of Commons about the trip when he initially answered questions about it earlier in the fall.

Search-and-rescue operations on the East Coast have been under severe strain because of chronic technical difficulties with the fleet of Cormorant helicopters. A briefing note to Mr. MacKay in 2010 warned that the Cormorant's availability was “barely adequate” to meet the search-and-rescue (SAR) requirements.

Two men involved in the pick-up are now publicly backing the Defence Minister.

A military technician who hoisted Mr. MacKay into the helicopter as it hovered near the lodge said it was entirely positive that the minister was actively involved with the work of the search-and-rescue team.

“As a SAR Tech, I appreciate the support the [Minister of National Defence] provides the [Canadian Forces] and I welcome future opportunities to conduct this style of contact training with any member of the government,” Warrant Officer Morgan Biderman said in an email sent to the Defence Department's public affairs office Wednesday.

“The positive aspects of Minister MacKay becoming actively involved in our training and the absolute trust he puts in the personnel of the Air Force, is what need to be emphasized! If it has a spin off benefit of transporting him-them, where they need to be, I consider it a win-win for all concerned!”

The pilot who flew the helicopter and commanded the Cormorant squadron told the iPolitics news website Wednesday that the trip was legitimate, given that it occurred during a regularly scheduled training flight and would have gone ahead with or without Mr. MacKay.

“This was a training flight that we were going to participate in,” said retired major Stephen Reid. “If the minister was able to slide his way in, in some fashion, that was fine with us.”

He added that the hoist technician, WO Biderman, needed the training.

Mr. MacKay's office says statements like that show the minister was telling the truth when he said he was taking advantage of an opportunity to participate in an exercise.

“Minister MacKay has had his character and personal reputation attacked,” spokesman Jay Paxton said. “Minister MacKay is looking into legal options against those who have attacked his integrity.”

Who exactly Mr. MacKay is considering suing is unclear. Some MPs accused the Defence Minister of lying outside the Commons, where they do not benefit from parliamentary privilege. Others, such as Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae, used terms such as “concocting the truth.”

Still, documents released to the Toronto Star under access-to-information legislation suggest air force officials had examined more options for Mr. MacKay's trip than just the Cormorant helicopters.

The documents showed scenarios were considered that included sending a crew from CFB Gagetown, or a CH-146 Griffon from Goose Bay, Nfld. Both options were ruled out because they were too far away.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has defended Mr. McKay by saying that flight was legitimate because the minister had been called back for government duties." - Jennifer Ditchburn, on The Globe and Mail.

But here's the thing, though: we don't question MacKay being brought *from* his vacation to his governmental duties, it's taking that same chopper *back* to his family vacation...

Check out this awe-inspiring, inspirational story (Click here).

A smiling face of optimism and hope as she battles for every breath she takes...

"From the time she was born, [20-year-old] Hélène [Campbell] has been on the move. Moments after birth, she had her groove going -her hands would not keep still. Now at twenty, not only is she constantly on the go, but her joyful personality contagiously lifts the spirits of others. Whether at school, work, church, in hospital, or studying in Spain, people have easily joined with her and enjoyed her positive vibe.

Hélène has been famous for her kindness towards others and she received an award for this in grade six. At her high school graduation, she was given the Christine Proulx Award for her cooperation and perpetual willingness to help others. Someone commented “She has such a bubbly disposition; she should have a new soft drink named after her.”

Hélène loves music. People marvel at the variety she keeps on her iPod and how she integrates it with another passion of hers – film making. She loves capturing memorable moments, but her specialty seems to be creating them. Her mini musical dance documentary in Spain involving many friends and strangers is the perfect example of her ability to create joyful moments out of daily experiences. She believes life is worth living and sharing, a theme through many of her videos. With music in the background, camera in hand, smile on her face and not a minute to lose, she’s on the move…

In July 2011, Hélène was admitted to The Ottawa Hospital with collapsed lungs. It was discovered that she suffers from advanced Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis. This means that her lungs have been permanently scarred by inflammation and the root cause of the inflammation is unknown. Treatment with Prednisone has not stopped the progression of the disease. Hélène requires oxygen to perform physical tasks. With twenty-four percent of remaining breathing capacity, a lung transplant is the next step. She has been referred to the Transplant Program in Toronto. She and some of her family must relocate from Ottawa to Toronto. 

This is a time of loss for Hélène - independence, physical strength, employment income, and savings for school. Despite this, she chooses to focus on the positives in her life like family, friends, new friends from her stay in hospital and creative media. We see her with her radiant smile, enjoying even the simplest things in life, like orange juice and Reese’s limited edition chocolate bars. Even though she must now pace herself, she is still always moving onward. 

-Hélène, you are an inspiration- 

If you wish to donate to Hélène's living expenses in Toronto, while she waits to receive new lungs and during her recovery, please visit alungstory.ca".

Pundits agree: First NDP leadership debate lacks a little... Jack.

Source: The Star.

"Once again, unanimity breaks out among the Ottawa punditerati. This time it relates to the first big debate in the NDP leadership race. Journalists covering the debate agree that they disagree on who did what.

Lawrence Martin at the Globe says the debate went to Thomas Mulciar, the Quebec candidate, and Niki Ashton, “the kid candidate.” Mulcair “came across as seasoned, articulate, very much at ease. There were no flashes of his reputed blowtorch temper. More so than the others, he had the presence of a leader.” As for Ashton: “Ottawa politics is so youth-deficient that it was a treat to see the zest and command of this 29 year-old multilingual Manitoban. She’s calling for a new politics. If her age and spontaneity helps get her generation involved in the process, she will have made progress toward her goal, striking a blow against the stale thinking of aging baby boomers.”

Hmm. [National Post's] own John [...] begs to differ somewhat. He agrees Mr. Mulcair was “the epitome of collegiality and good humour” (which is significant because his temper is generally portrayed as just this side of an erupting volcano), but doesn’t think he has much hope outside Quebec. Ms. Ashton is lumped in with the also-rans, while corporate Canada is warned to watch out for Peggy Nash: ” Ms. Nash claims that the countries that have truly succeeded “haven’t handed over all decision-making power to corporations. By the sound of her plan, under a Nash government those decisions would be made by the unions, which she considers to be an extension of the party, and the government. Ms. Nash put in a solid performance and nobody should be at all surprised if she ends up winning next March.”

Barbara Yaffe of the Vancouver Sun of the Vancouver Sun thought no one was very impressive. She thinks Ashton “looked too pixie to be going for a top political job” and the candidates spent too much time agreeing with one another to create “distinctive storylines” that might make them stand out. The most intriguing moment, she thought, was when the candidates were asked who they support besides themselves. Topp and Nash both picked Ashton, probably because they figure she can’t win and are keen to gather in her supporters.

The Star's Tim Harper , like several others, thought B.C. MP Nathan Cullen outperformed expectations and that former party strategist Brian Topp “delivered perhaps the most succinct, substantive and thought-provoking answers of the afternoon, and showed an aggressive streak when he unexpectedly went after Paul Dewar over the Ottawa Centre MP’s economic plan.”

(Ivision says Topp probably went after Dewar because he has data showing Dewar is beating him, which “suggests the received wisdom that he is in the lead is wrong, as usual.”)

Rabble.ca, the left-wing site most likely to be NDP-friendly, thought the contenders “limped out of the starting gate.”

“From the dire situation in Attawapiskat to the manufacturing sector and green collar jobs — the candidates agreed, agreed and agreed again.” Mulcair “largely flew under the radar,” while Nash “largely stuck to rhetoric”. Ashton was interesting, but also prone to rhetoric and armed with something called “new Politics” which “had a few people scratching their heads.”

So, Mulcair was either a clear winner, or a non-event; Nash was heavy on rhetoric but could be a surprise; Ashton was a breath of fresh air or an also-ran who’s too much of a pixie to be taken seriously; and Dewar might be doing way better than anyone knows. The one thing everyone agreed on was that Nova Scotia’s Robert Chisholm was an embarrassment, who couldn’t speak French and looked silly pledging to learn it ASAP. (Anyone mention the Orange Crush, Robert? It happened in Quebec. Where they speak French.)" - Kelly McParland, National Post. 

Check out this awesome prize pack!

iPad 2 and iPhone 4S!

Documents show ‘harperization’ of government communications

"Federal public servants were trying to understand the wholesale “harperization” of Government of Canada communications six months before a spokesman for the prime minister emphatically denied any change in policy or practice.

New documents obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act directly contradict published claims by Stephen Harper’s chief spokesman that bureaucrats have not been directed to replace the words Government of Canada with “Harper Government” in departmental news releases and backgrounders.

Top former civil servants say the wording change marks a disturbing new trend in the politicization of the bureaucracy – and breaches both communications policy and the civil service ethics policy.

Insiders say ongoing editing skirmishes continue between some government departments with strong leadership and the Privy Council Office, the bureaucracy known as PCO that serves the prime minister.

Industry Canada took nearly nine months to deliver documents based on the access request, ignoring statutory deadlines for releasing the records. The Information Commissioner deemed a complaint by The Canadian Press about the delay to be well-founded, determining the department had refused to provide access under the Act.

The “deemed refusal” appears profoundly political, given the contents.

Industry Canada’s e-mails and edited releases from autumn 2010 make a mockery of Conservative government denials offered when The Canadian Press first published reports of the name-change orders last March.

“The directive we have from the (director general’s office) is that if PCO adds the Harper Government reference, then we leave it in,” says an e-mail to communications officials at Industry, dated Oct. 5, 2010. “Please proceed with this approach. Sorry – it is what PCO has instructed.”

An editor responded: “Given this directive, and with mild distress, I have reinstalled the phrasing.”

“French release harperized and good to go,” quipped another.

Civil servants were clearly alarmed by the change in nomenclature as far back as late September 2010.

“‘Harper Government’ is not in line with the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, so I have modified it,” wrote a member of Industry Canada’s communications branch after PCO sent back an altered release.

“Please see Chris Fox to make sure we are actually adding ‘Harper Government’ to the release,” wrote another. “This is not appropriate language, in my opinion.”

“We understand that Harper Government will not be used by Editorial,” wrote yet another public servant at the time. “It has been requested of us by PCO, however.”

When the change in nomenclature was revealed last March, Mr. Harper’s chief spokesman at the time, Dimitri Soudas, wrote to Canadian newspapers asserting “no directive” went out to civil servants. “Nothing could be further from the truth,” he declared.

Mr. Soudas, who has since left the PMO to become executive director of communications for the Canadian Olympic Association, also called the revelations by The Canadian Press the stuff of “black helicopters and conspiracy theories.”

Stockwell Day, then the Treasury Board president, told the House of Commons “there has been no change of policy or practice.”

Despite scores of pages of internal e-mails about the orders from several different departments, the PMO continues to maintain the enforced name-change didn’t happen.

“Dimitri’s comments from March stand,” Andrew MacDougall, Harper’s associate director of communications, said late Monday.

He noted Industry Canada’s website currently includes plenty of “Government of Canada” usages.

“As for the term ‘Harper Government”, as we’ve said many times, this has been long-standing practice across various governments,” Mr. MacDougall continued in an e-mail. “This terminology is widely used by journalists and the public.”

Yet more than a year ago, on Oct. 22, 2010, an Industry public servant noted in writing that “as per our directive from PCO, I have left in the phrase ‘Harper Government.”‘ Another editor further up the chain repeated the same caveat, word-for-word – “as per our directive from PCO” – in clearing the changes.

Why the ostensibly non-partisan Privy Council would undertake such a controversial change in communications policy, if not on directions from the prime minister, remains a mystery.

The Prime Minister’s Office has simply ignored for months repeated inquiries about the motivation for the shift in language.

Jonathan Rose, an expert in political communication at Queen’s University, suggests it’s a partisan branding exercise designed to “encourage a subtle shift to occur where the government of Canada is equated with a particular party or leader.”

“It allows for a more seamless connection between the neutral machinery of the state and the partisan interests of those in government,” said Mr. Rose.

Canadians should take note, he said.

“The public service is correctly asking questions, as there does not seem to be a clear policy rationale for neutral public servants to do the partisan bidding of a government,” said Mr. Rose.

On Sept. 30, 2010, a Privy Council official wrote he was “waiting to hear back from my friends next door,” when asked by Industry about editing changes that added “Harper Government” to a news release.

“My counterparts next door have requested a change to the headline (below),” the official responded soon after, above a “Harper Government” headline.

Others within government were also wondering where and why the change was being ordered.

An official with the Networks of Centres of Excellence, a research granting agency that deals with business, academic and not-for-profit organizations, sent an e-mail to Industry’s communications group last December: “Is there an official policy change that now allows for changes such as Harper Government. I may need an official explanation for our partners.”

The communications official kicked the request up to Shannon Cassidy, a manager in public affairs and “ministerial services” at Industry.

“Did you ever get any rationale from PCO or anyone on this?” asked the official.

No response to the e-mail was included in the Access to Information package.

There is still none to this day." - Bruce Cheadle and Jennifer Ditchburn, The Canadian Press on The Globe and Mail.

"I'll show you mine if you show me yours": NDP want to see Harper's Office Staff salaries and expenses

"The New Democrats are countering a request by a Conservative MP to see the salaries of top CBC on-air personalities by asking for the same level of disclosure of pay for senior staff in the Prime Minister’s Office, including chief of staff Nigel Wright and communications director Angelo Persichilli.

Conservative Brent Rathgeber last week tabled an order paper question calling on the public broadcaster to reveal how much it pays anchor Peter Mansbridge and comedian Rick Mercer, as well as produce a list of all CBC staff making more than $100,000 annually. The CBC might have an out via the Broadcast Act and it is uncertain whether it will be required to comply with the request.

But it’s hard to see how the Prime Minister’s Office can dodge the NDP’s request to produce the salaries and benefits paid to, among others, former directors of communications Dimitri Soudas, now with the Canadian Olympic Committee, and Kory Teneycke, who now helps run Sun News Network.  The request also asks for hospitality and travel expenses.

The employees named are “exempt staff,” whose salaries are supposed to be pegged to the pay ranges for equivalent positions in the public service. Where exactly they land in those ranges is not known.

In one of three order paper questions tabled Monday byMP Tyrone Benskin , the NDP asks for:

Mr. Benskin (Jeanne-Le Ber) – With Regard to the Prime Minister’s Office and its current and former employment of Bruce Carson, Dimitri Soudas, Sandra Buckler, Guy Giorno, Nigel Wright, Ian Brodie, Ray Novak, Andrew McDougall, Kory Teneycke, Alykhan Velshi and Angelo Persichilli: (a) what were/are the employment agreements with each of these individuals in terms of (i) salary, (ii) vehicle allowance or provision of car and/or driver, (iii) expense account for food, drink, alcohol and hospitality, (iv) out-of-town accommodations for the individual; (b) in each of the years between 2000 and 2011, how much did each of these individuals expense for (i) food, (ii) travel, (iii) hotels, (iv) hospitality, (v) drink, (vi) vehicle use; (c) what were the itemized amounts and descriptions of each individual’s individual expenses as identified in the answers to (b); and (d) if the PMO provides any of these individuals with a vehicle for his use, as identified in the answers to (a)(ii), broken down by individual, (i) what is the model and make of the car, (ii) how much does this benefit cost the PMO on an annual basis?

Just as Rathbeger asked for a list of CBC employees making more than $100,000 a year, the NDP is also calling for the same from PMO and other ministers’ offices.

And in language nearly identical to one of Rathbeger’s order paper questions for hospitality expenses from overseas CBC bureaus, the NDP wants the same accounting for PMO and other ministerial staff expenses claimed for hospitality, food, drinks, hotels and transportation in Rome, London, Washington, Paris and Boston.

The government will have 45 days to answer the questions." - Glenn McGregor, The Ottawa Citizen.