2/06/2006

Dingwall's Severance II: Who Fires
the Head that Wears the Crown?

It is certainly clear that someone is lying. Mere days before the election an independent arbitrator, George Adams, a retired Ontario Superior Court judge ruled that Dingwall had been "effectively fired." He did not voluntarily resign, as he had initially claimed. Conservatives now wonder if this coverup cost them a majority in the House.
I don't know if, had it been released at the proper time, the news of Dingwall's severance would have given the Conservatives a majority. It might have given them a few more seats. It probably would also have lent the NDP a few more seats. In my opinion, people had enough information already to do more damage to the Liberals on voting day, and they chose not too. It's hard to say what affect one more piece of information would have had.
Having said that, I think what the Liberals did was very wrong. I also have my suspicions about the independence of this arbitrator. How is it possible for him to find that Dingwall had been "effectively" fired, when everyone said he had resigned? And what does "effectively" mean? Also, when am I, Jane-Average-Canadian going to get a look at that report?
There's one other thing I'd like to point out. Only the Prime Minister can hire and fire the heads of Crown Corporations. No one in the news seems to be pointing this fact out. Would someone please interview the former Prime Minister? I'd like to hear what he has to say on the subject.

No comments:

Listed on BlogsCanada Blogarama - The Blog Directory Powered by Blogger FeedBurner Blogging Tories
Southern Ontario Conservatives