Would you trust this member of parliament?
This letter was sent on June 10, 2006 to a member of the Canadian Parliament who accepted large donations from small children whose father was supporting him in his run for office again. This was against the law.
Joe Vope
Member of Parliament 520 Bronson Avenue
Ottawa, Ontario
K1R 7Y9
Dear Mr. Vope:
I am deeply concerned that a member of parliament such as yourself would accept donations from young children for his leadership race, notwithstanding the fact that the money really came from the children’s father.
As you know, there is a limit on the amount of money that private individuals can donate to politicians running for federal office, the limit being $5,400.
There is obviously a very good reason for this. If there was no limit and a multi-millionaire wanted to have a great deal of influence over the politician he has sponsored, that politician may find it very difficult to ignore the demands of the person who put him in office. It would also be conceivable that such a donor would receive preferable treatment over a constituent who doesn’t have enough money to live on and therefore couldn’t contribute to the politician’s fundraising campaign.
It is apparent to most if not all Canadians that the executive of Apotex Inc who contributed $27,000 to your coffers under the guise that it was his children, ages 11 and 14 who made the contributions, tried to go around the limitation by claiming that each of his children made the contributions. You in turn decided to thwart the intent of the limitation by accepting the money.
The actions of this executive as I see it, is tantamount to lobbying for your cooperation with respect to his business. When executives of companies begin lobbying members of parliament, it is a sure sign that their companies have lost their fight in the civil service and the cabinet. Anything that that executive or anyone else from his firm does in attempting to influence you will be looked upon by the citizens of Canada as lobbying at its worst.
It is an insult to all Canadians that both of you really thought that we are so naïve that you could pull this off and get away with it. Judging by the manner in which you tried to justify your actions, I strongly suspect that you would also accept donations from the estates of deceased pets if no one found you out.
The fact that you returned the money is evidence that you finally realize that you were wrong in accepting it in the first place.
Your political party is already reeling from the corruption that took place when it was in power and now you have the audacity to run for the leadership of the Liberal Party. It must be obvious to you by now that Canadians recognize that excellence in the ranks of political parties is as rare as excellent in command. It is a fallacy that members of parliament are of a standard that makes them excellent. Admittedly, there have been some exceptions and such men have shown the body politic that they were highly qualified for the task of leading our country. But surely, you are not going to tell us that your qualities as a politician and as a potential leader of your party are based on your excellence as a member of parliament. To do so is to insult our intelligence.
Alas, the time for your departure has come. Let me quote from Sir Allan MacNab in his May 23, 1856 speech when he addressed the Canadian members of parliament on his resignation as Canada’s Prime Minister. He said;
“If I am supported by their voice, I will feel that I am right. If condemned, I am ready to retire into private life, and, perhaps, I am now fitted for little else.”
I don’t know if you are fitted for little else but you surely have been condemned and it is time for you to retire into private life.
I rarely write politicians but when I do, it is because they have behaved badly while in office and every one of them I wrote to, either left politics on their own or were defeated at the polls but none of them reached their goals they had aimed for, to wit; becoming leaders of their parties or their governments.
Aside from ability, Canadians search for honesty in politicians and if honesty is found suspiciously lacking in a politician, that man or woman is considered unsuitable for office, and either voted out of office or put to such shame, that he or she leaves office on his or her own initiative.
In the days when Rome’s influence was at his peak, disgraced generals fell on their own sword. I don’t want you to fall on your sword. Simply pack up your things and slip out of Ottawa on your own in the dark of night and let those hopefuls running for the leadership of your party try to bring some credibility back to their party without you hanging around their necks like the albatross of the Ancient Mariner.
Trusting that you will act responsibly, I remain,
Yours truly
Dahn Batchelor
At the time of this writing, he is still running for leadership of his party.
Joe Vope
Member of Parliament 520 Bronson Avenue
Ottawa, Ontario
K1R 7Y9
Dear Mr. Vope:
I am deeply concerned that a member of parliament such as yourself would accept donations from young children for his leadership race, notwithstanding the fact that the money really came from the children’s father.
As you know, there is a limit on the amount of money that private individuals can donate to politicians running for federal office, the limit being $5,400.
There is obviously a very good reason for this. If there was no limit and a multi-millionaire wanted to have a great deal of influence over the politician he has sponsored, that politician may find it very difficult to ignore the demands of the person who put him in office. It would also be conceivable that such a donor would receive preferable treatment over a constituent who doesn’t have enough money to live on and therefore couldn’t contribute to the politician’s fundraising campaign.
It is apparent to most if not all Canadians that the executive of Apotex Inc who contributed $27,000 to your coffers under the guise that it was his children, ages 11 and 14 who made the contributions, tried to go around the limitation by claiming that each of his children made the contributions. You in turn decided to thwart the intent of the limitation by accepting the money.
The actions of this executive as I see it, is tantamount to lobbying for your cooperation with respect to his business. When executives of companies begin lobbying members of parliament, it is a sure sign that their companies have lost their fight in the civil service and the cabinet. Anything that that executive or anyone else from his firm does in attempting to influence you will be looked upon by the citizens of Canada as lobbying at its worst.
It is an insult to all Canadians that both of you really thought that we are so naïve that you could pull this off and get away with it. Judging by the manner in which you tried to justify your actions, I strongly suspect that you would also accept donations from the estates of deceased pets if no one found you out.
The fact that you returned the money is evidence that you finally realize that you were wrong in accepting it in the first place.
Your political party is already reeling from the corruption that took place when it was in power and now you have the audacity to run for the leadership of the Liberal Party. It must be obvious to you by now that Canadians recognize that excellence in the ranks of political parties is as rare as excellent in command. It is a fallacy that members of parliament are of a standard that makes them excellent. Admittedly, there have been some exceptions and such men have shown the body politic that they were highly qualified for the task of leading our country. But surely, you are not going to tell us that your qualities as a politician and as a potential leader of your party are based on your excellence as a member of parliament. To do so is to insult our intelligence.
Alas, the time for your departure has come. Let me quote from Sir Allan MacNab in his May 23, 1856 speech when he addressed the Canadian members of parliament on his resignation as Canada’s Prime Minister. He said;
“If I am supported by their voice, I will feel that I am right. If condemned, I am ready to retire into private life, and, perhaps, I am now fitted for little else.”
I don’t know if you are fitted for little else but you surely have been condemned and it is time for you to retire into private life.
I rarely write politicians but when I do, it is because they have behaved badly while in office and every one of them I wrote to, either left politics on their own or were defeated at the polls but none of them reached their goals they had aimed for, to wit; becoming leaders of their parties or their governments.
Aside from ability, Canadians search for honesty in politicians and if honesty is found suspiciously lacking in a politician, that man or woman is considered unsuitable for office, and either voted out of office or put to such shame, that he or she leaves office on his or her own initiative.
In the days when Rome’s influence was at his peak, disgraced generals fell on their own sword. I don’t want you to fall on your sword. Simply pack up your things and slip out of Ottawa on your own in the dark of night and let those hopefuls running for the leadership of your party try to bring some credibility back to their party without you hanging around their necks like the albatross of the Ancient Mariner.
Trusting that you will act responsibly, I remain,
Yours truly
Dahn Batchelor
At the time of this writing, he is still running for leadership of his party.
posted by Dahn Batchelor | 7:55 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home