Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

The Canadian Election - Liberals Win Majority


DonLever

Recommended Posts

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/harper-government-partnered-with-industry-group-fighting-cra-over-kpmg-case-1.3257994


Harper government partnered with industry group fighting CRA over KPMG case Minister championed 'collaboration' with CPA Canada as organization was battling tax investigators

The Harper government forged a partnership with a major Canadian accounting association, formalizing it as an adviser to the Canada Revenue Agency, at the same time as the group was fighting the CRA in court to shield the files of multimillionaires who had stashed money offshore.

Revenue Minister Kerry-Lynne Findlay trumpeted the alliance in November 2014 as a "new era of information and collaboration" between the Canada Revenue Agency and Chartered Professional Accountants of Canada.

CPA Canada represents and lobbies on behalf of most accounting firms in Canada, including KPMG, which the government was pursuing in court at the time to obtain a list of wealthy clients enrolled in an offshore tax scheme in the Isle of Man.

The agreement, signed by Canada Revenue Agency chief executive officer Andrew Treusch and CPA Canada head Kevin Dancey, called for the formation of joint committees with senior representatives from both groups — and "ensures" that the CRA will consider the accounting group's "input" into any changes to its programs and services, according to a government news release.

"We value our role as a trusted adviser to the CRA," Dancey said after the agreement was signed.

andrew-treusch-kerry-lynne-findlay-and-k

Revenue Minister Kerry-Lynne Findlay watches CRA chief Andrew Treusch, left, and CPA Canada president Kevin Dancey sign a partnership agreement in November.

Three months before the government announced the partnership, Prime Minister Stephen Harper himself met with CPA Canada and the heads of KPMG and other major accounting firms. The exceptional visit on Aug. 13, 2014, to the industry association's headquarters in Toronto was recorded in the federal lobbying registry.

The files show KPMG, CPA Canada and another firm met with Harper, his chief of staff Ray Novak and two other aides, though the Prime Minister's Office won't say what was discussed except to say it was a routine stakeholder meeting.

"This is a serious problem, certainly a perception of conflict of interest. The government shouldn't be cozying up to companies that they've taken to court over very serious allegations," said Dennis Howlett, executive director of Canadians for Tax Fairness.

Howlett said the government should have thought more about partnerships and high-level meetings with an industry whose clients it audits and investigates.

"When they get in bed with the very companies that they're supposed to be regulating, it leads to all kinds of dangerous results," Howlett said.

Duff Conacher, who teaches government ethics at the University of Ottawa, said the agreement might send mixed signals to CRA staff auditing clients of CPA Canada member firms.

"It sends a very bad message. Essentially it says don't enforce laws fully and properly because the government is now a partner with this organization and you wouldn't want to make the government look bad."

CPA joined fight to shield KPMG client files

At the same time as forming their partnership with CRA, CPA Canada was also opposing federal tax authorities in a major legal battle against the government over access to records of KPMG clients ensnared in an offshore tax probe.

In February 2013, the CRA obtained a judge's order to force KPMG to hand over the names and all its files from "high net worth" Canadians involved in a KPMG-created tax avoidance scheme in the Isle of Man. Tax officials claim the scheme is a "sham" that allegedly "intended to deceive" tax investigators.

CPA Canada formally intervened to join KPMG's fight against the federal government in October 2013, court records show.

Dancey, CPA Canada's president, told CBC News in a statement there is a principle of confidentiality at stake.

"Taxpayers have the right to obtain independent, confidential tax advice so they can understand and comply with Canada's complex tax laws," he explained.

Howlett, of Canadians for Tax Fairness, said he suspects CPA Canada is involved in the KPMG case because it might set a precedent for the entire industry.

"They're nervous that if the government… gets the evidence they need to pursue another case against KPMG, then this whole house of cards, of sham companies and offshore banking, is going to come tumbling down," Howlett told CBC News.

The CRA's case against KPMG had remained mysteriously stalled for more than two years without a single court date. Then, after a series of stories by CBC News and Radio-Canada about the case in September, a KPMG lawyer told the court just last week that out-of-court settlement talks had failed — and both sides are now asking for a hearing before a judge.

'Not about trying to hide nefarious tax schemes'

In addition to CPA Canada's intervention in the KPMG case, the association has also been campaigning for limits on what accounting firms have to provide to tax authorities when clients are being audited and investigated. The campaign has included lobbying Ottawa bureaucrats, politicians and their staff on related topics for several years, a review of lobby registry records shows.

According to those records, CPA Canada was particularly concerned with the CRA's "access to auditors/accountants working papers" — one of the central issues in the alleged KPMG tax "sham" case.

CPA Canada has also registered to lobby Ottawa on "third-party liability" — the penalties and fines imposed by the CRA on accountants and others who facilitate aggressive tax avoidance by their clients.

Gabe Hayos, vice-president of tax for CPA Canada, said that the association has "long been on the record opposing tax evasion" and that the lobbying campaign is "not about people trying to hide nefarious tax schemes" but rather about ensuring accountants can provide candid, thorough advice to their clients. "All taxpayers have the right to have confidential conversations with their advisers," he said.

Hayos added that the "the ultimate authority" in CPA Canada's partnership with the government "rests as always with the CRA."

He also said there is no connection between the association's Ottawa lobbying and its involvement in the KPMG court case.

As for the meeting with Harper, CPA Canada head Dancey told CBC in an email that his organization did not raise the KPMG court case or any related policy matters with the prime minister or his staff. A spokesperson for Revenue Minister Kerry-Lynne Findlay said neither she nor her staff have ever been approached to discuss the KPMG case.

In a further statement CPA's Dancey said, "For more than a decade we have sought some form of protection for auditor's working papers and the tax advice provided by professional accountants. We have always been transparent and reported all our organization's lobbying activities."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support the best chance of getting Harper out and the Reformative party completely destroyed. Putting the Reform Party in power was a mistake. It's time to erase that mistake. If the Liberals win, which was likely until the Ndp shocked Canada and took Alberta, so be it.

Word.

I loved the Reform party with all the not so closet homophobes and racist candidates here in BC.

Before Harper I would've died before I ever voted NDP, but needs must.

I have been reading the news pages etc. it seems as the cons volunteers have been going ape crap on the comments section. They are all pretty obvious with the Justin quotes and then calling ball face Mr. Harper. Trying to make Treudeu seem like a kid. HE JUST ISN'T READY FOLKS! :sick: the election can't end soon enough, so I no longer have to see those fracking ads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conservatives on a roll.

Yet ANOTHER wtf moment for a Con candidate.

She may not be the smartest but she wasn’t lying about pipelines being the safest and most environmental means to transport oil. Which is the real issue. Not only that but pipeline would also allow us to sell our oil without the bottleneck. Meaning more value without discounted prices.

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/08/29/cody-battershill-new-report-confirms-pipeline-safety-again/

To the stack of reports showing pipelines are the safest way to transport liquid fuels over long distances, you can add yet another – this one from the prestigious Fraser Institute.

The latest report, called “Safety in the Transportation of Oil and Gas: Pipelines or Rail?,” shows rail is “over 4.5 times more likely to experience an occurrence when compared to pipelines.”

It’s an important finding. Just don’t be surprised when you hear not a single word from anti-pipeline activists about the growing body of scientific and statistical evidence on pipeline safety.

These oppositional groups continue to make misleading, unscientific claims about a pipeline sector that is not only incredibly safe but also vital to Canada’s socio-economic well-being.

A primary aim of anti-oil sands campaigners, supported by multi-billion dollar American foundations, is to significantly reduce future demand for oil from the oilsands by stopping the expansion of pipelines.

But like so much of the anti-oil sands movement, the aim is faulty: stopping construction of new pipelines won’t stop new production and growth in the oilsands.

In fact, production in the oil sands keeps rising – and that’s in spite of falling oil prices. Arc Financial Corp. says an additional 300,000 barrels a day will be produced in the oilsands this year alone.

That’s because despite falling oil prices, companies have made long-term commitments and investments in the oilsands. These investments will continue to allow for increasing production as greater efficiencies are found.

So if anti-oil sands campaigners are trying to reduce production in the oil sands, they’re failing miserably even in a brutal price environment.

More important, that increased oil production isn’t standing still – it’s being moved. Stalled pipeline expansion means more and more of this new production is moving by other means, primarily rail.

Here’s where the latest Fraser Institute report comes in again.

Given the superior safety record of pipelines over rail in transporting liquid fuels, pipeline opponents are, in effect, making the transportation of oil less rather than more safe by stalling pipeline expansion; they are guaranteeing more and more oil gets shipped by rail.

The report quotes the US State Department’s own analysis, which shows that “[c]omparing the number of incidents per ton-miles reported between 2002 and 2009, rail transport had the highest incident frequency for both crude oil and petroleum products of all modes of transport.”

And contrary to claims by some anti-oilsands activists that bitumen is corrosive and increases the risk of pipeline spills, no less than the US National Academy of Sciences — one of the most prestigious scientific bodies on the planet – says this is false.

The Fraser Institute underlines that the Academy found “no evidence that diluted bitumen . . . would contribute to pipeline failures or corrosion.”

Furthermore, with regard to worker safety, the report, quoting an analysis by the Manhattan Institute, notes “rail [compared to pipelines] causes nearly 40 times that many injuries requiring hospitalization on a per-ton-mile basis.”

So pipelines are 4.5 times safer than rail in terms of both accidents and (less serious) incidents occurring. They also have a big advantage over rail or truck transport when it comes to worker safety.

Canadian pipelines are so safe that, as the report makes clear, “between 2011 and 2013, 99.999 percent of crude oil and petroleum products arrived at their destination.”

And in the very rare instance when a spill does occur, 70 percent are “spills of 1 m3 or less.” And the vast majority of such spills occur not in the pipe itself, but at processing facilities that “may have secondary containment mechanisms and procedures.”

Clearly, no source of energy or mode of transportation is without of some degree of risk. The key is to minimize such risk through innovation and mitigation.

The Fraser Institute report is only the latest in a long and impressive body of analysis that convincingly shows pipelines are the safest of all modes of oil transport.

That’s why, in the rest of the world, including the US, more than 100,000 miles of pipelines are planned or under construction.

Just don’t expect to hear about it from the anti-pipeline folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TOML you keep posting these stories but you seem to ignore any other parties moments. Why call out one party and not the others for stupid moments? Being a bit hypocritical are we?

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/09/24/hamilton-ndp-candidate-invited-on-trip-to-auschwitz-trip

TORONTO - My great-grandparents were killed there.

My grandparents’ parents, brothers, sisters, nieces and nephews — all rounded up in Poland, shoved into cattle cars and delivered to the railway platform of Auschwitz. From there, they were eventually marched into the gas chambers as part of the Nazis’ Final Solution to rid Europe of its Jews, part of the 8,000-a-day murdered in their death factory.

Their escape blocked by armed guards and an electrified fence of barbed wire.

So may I offer a basic tip, whether you’re a politician, a school trustee or just a young social worker: Don’t joke about Auschwitz. And if caught, don’t make it worse by insisting that you didn’t mean anything by it because you’d never even heard of the infamous death camp.

Shame on Hamilton NDP candidate Alex Johnstone for doing all of the above.

In 2008, in her mid-20s, she saw a friend’s photo of Auschwitz posted on Facebook and made a stupid penis joke about the electrified wire towers. “Ahhh, the infamous Pollish (sic), phallic, hydro posts … of course you took pictures of this! It expresses how the curve is normal, natural and healthy right!” she wrote.

Her spectacular display of poor taste is shocking enough, especially from someone who’s now vice-chair of the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board and a highly educated social worker who wrote her master’s thesis that same year: “Beyond Professional Affiliation: Race, Class & Gender Dynamics in Interdisciplinary Teams.”

Even more astounding was what happened when she was called out for it seven years later. She apologized, blamed her “mudslinging” opponents and then offered this incredulous defence to the Hamilton Spectator: “Well, I didn’t know what Auschwitz was, or I didn’t up until today.”

As political pundit Warren Kinsella tweeted: “She had a choice: Admit to being stupid or admit to being unbelievably offensive. She chose stupid.”

Or rather, she chose both.

Has she been living under a rock? Can someone in this day and age really not know about the Nazi concentration camp where almost one million Jews were slaughtered during the Second World War, the site of history’s single-largest mass murder? Can someone in charge of our children’s education be that ignorant?

Please. I find that incredibly hard to believe. More likely, when unmasked for making such an insensitive comment, Johnstone dug her hole even deeper and feigned ignorance.

How much more terrifying is the possibility that she truly didn’t know about such a monumental period in 20th-century history. Are there really young leaders unaware of the forced labour, the gas chambers, the Josef Mengele experiments that were the horrors of Auschwitz only 70 years ago?

How can she be the kind of candidate the NDP wants to put forward? So far, Tom Mulcair has remained silent.

As for the Hamilton board, chair Todd White is actually standing by his vice-chair: “We expect our staff and students to have an understanding of the Holocaust and believe we should model this as trustees,” he acknowledged in a statement.

“In speaking to trustee Johnstone, she understands the importance of Holocaust awareness and has committed to taking an active role in promoting Holocaust education in HWDSB.”

Avi Benlolo, president of Friends of Simon Weisenthal Centre for Holocaust Studies, learned of the scandal after Yom Kippur — the holiest day on the Jewish calendar.

“It is certainly highly disturbing that someone in her position, not only running for office but more importantly as a co-chair of a school board, would be ignorant to Auschwitz and the symbolism of that fence,” he said in an interview. “It is flabbergasting.”

In a later statement, he added: “For a school board trustee and federal candidate to profess ignorance about the most infamous symbol of the most meticulously planned genocide in human history should be a wake-up call to all parents and educators in this province.”

But Benlolo doesn’t want her to quit. “Our approach is to turn this into an opportunity with a positive slant,” he explained. “If someone is ignorant, let’s educate them.”

He’s invited Johnstone to join their annual mission, which will visit Auschwitz on Oct. 13.

Hopefully she’ll have been stripped of her candidacy by then and she’ll have all the time in the world to attend

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/liberal-candidate-apologizes-for-statements-on-middle-east-during-debate-1.2591004

The Liberal candidate for the riding of Kitchener South-Hespeler apologized Thursday for two statements he made earlier in the week at a debate.

During Monday’s forum, which was organized by the Greater Kitchener-Waterloo Chamber of Commerce, Marwan Tabbara said that Jean Chretien refused to send troops into Afghanistan when he was prime minister.

“In 2003 … he said ‘I will not go into Afghanistan, I will not go into Iraq,” Tabbara said.

“What happened in 2006? Harper follows and he goes into Iraq and Afghanistan.”

In fact, Canada began sending troops to Afghanistan in 2001.

In an interview with CTV News, Tabbara said he misspoke during the debate and only meant to illustrate that he, personally, only sees war as a “last resort”.

“I did say something that was incorrect, and I really apologize,” he said.

Asked about his current understanding of Canada’s role in Iraq, the first-time candidate replied “I don’t have all that information. I’m only a candidate right now, so I couldn’t comment.”

He went on to say that he studied Middle Eastern politics while in university and understands the instability in the region.

“What some people aren’t understanding is (that) you need to take some research into understanding some of this stuff that’s going on in the Middle East,” he said.

Tabbara’s statement was also challenged at the debate, by Conservative candidate Marian Gagne.

He replied by asking “So is bombing Syrian children OK?”

In an interview on Thursday, Gagne said she was “shocked and appalled” by Tabbara’s remarks.

“The comments were so disturbing,” she said.

“I do appreciate that he apologized, but it still makes me wonder about the underlying thought process of the Liberal Party.”

Later in the day Thursday, Tabbara issued a statement again apologizing for what he said.

“I apologize unreservedly for my disrespectful comments in yesterday’s debate and for insinuating that the Canadian Armed Forces are bombing Syrian civilians,” he said.

“This is false and I am retracting my comments. I have the highest respect for the men and women in our Armed Forces. ISIL represents a real and serious threat to security in the region and beyond.”

For his part, NDP candidate Lorne Bruce said he wasn’t sure why Tabbara was talking about the issue at all.

“We were very much focused on economics at the time,” he said.

“I wasn’t sure how he got there during that conversation.”

Green Party candidate David Weber also took part in Monday’s forum. He did not respond to a request for comment before this story was published.

Or

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/06/19/saskatchewan-liberal-candidate-withdraws-over-facebook-post/

or

http://globalnews.ca/news/2171816/go-blow-your-brains-out-calgary-liberal-candidate-apologizes-for-offensive-tweets/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She may not be the smartest but she wasn’t lying about pipelines being the safest and most environmental means to transport oil. Which is the real issue. Not only that but pipeline would also allow us to sell our oil without the bottleneck. Meaning more value without discounted prices.

http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/08/29/cody-battershill-new-report-confirms-pipeline-safety-again/

Quoting Fraser Institute..... :picard:

This Conservative Says The Ground Absorbs The Oil From Pipeline Spills

Oil is a natural substance, she said. So spilling into the environment, the land will absorb it because thats what oil is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw those. Not even close to the same controversy level. The last two are pathetic.

I suppose the main difference is that the party in power many, many ongoing scandals associated with it. So desperate sweeping for off-color jokes by opposing party candidates in facebook and twitter is hardly a defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Candidate removed:

OTTAWA -- The Conservative party says a candidate who defended therapies that attempt to turn gays straight is no longer their official representative in a suburban Toronto riding, although it is too late to remove him from the ballot.

Jagdish Grewal, who is running in Mississauga-Malton, wrote an editorial entitled "Is it wrong for a homosexual to become a normal person?" that referred to homosexuality as "unnatural behaviour" and heterosexuals as "normal."

A party spokeswoman said Tuesday night that Grewal's comments "are not reflective of the views of the Conservative Party of Canada."

Maybe some people really don't wanna be gay. I see nothing wrong with this therapy. At the end of the day it's still your choice to try this therapy in the first place.

I saw a guy on the TLC original series "My Strange Addiction" who was in love with his car, sexually. If that guy woke up one day and was like, "I want a wife and kids, maybe I should seek therapy so I can stop having sex with my 1996 sunfire's tail pipe." Would anyone question him?

This pro-gay political correctness is completely out of control. No matter how you look at it being gay is a tough life and maybe some people would sooner try something like this rather than being alienated by a old school dad or group of buddies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This pro-gay political correctness is completely out of control. No matter how you look at it being gay is a tough life and maybe some people would sooner try something like this rather than being alienated by a old school dad or group of buddies.

Wow...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you posted that image of your google searches and in everything you say on this board on the topic.

And why do you want a monarchy? What are the advantages you see?

No... people aren't born gay, but 99.999% of the time people don't "choose" to be attracted to the same sex.

And the advantage I see in a monarchy is that it's not a democracy. I think democracy is wack. But it's what we have, so I'll roll with it. There's more respect and honour in a land ruled under a king. There is order without it necessarily being a police state. I don't see that in modern democracy, but that could just be the entitlement society we've dug ourselves into.

The Conservatives make me sick.

There are actually some decent Conservative candidates, but not as many as there should be, or even compared to the other parties.

I'm not a fan of the alternatives, but the Conservatives do need a shakeup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow...

Put your political correctness aside for one moment and look at reality. One of my best friends growing up was gay, and it was really really really hard on him and his family. Poor bastard tried to kill himself. Some people aren't that strong and it's a possible alternative solution to facing that kinda pain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No... people aren't born gay, but 99.999% of the time people don't "choose" to be attracted to the same sex.

And the advantage I see in a monarchy is that it's not a democracy. I think democracy is wack. But it's what we have, so I'll roll with it. There's more respect and honour in a land ruled under a king. There is order without it necessarily being a police state. I don't see that in modern democracy, but that could just be the entitlement society we've dug ourselves into.

There are actually some decent Conservative candidates, but not as many as there should be, or even compared to the other parties.

I'm not a fan of the alternatives, but the Conservatives do need a shakeup.

They'll probably put it all on Harper, but it goes far deeper than that. It's too bad the old PC party can't just return from the grave. Hey, how about PM Ben Mulroney? :lol:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No... people aren't born gay, but 99.999% of the time people don't "choose" to be attracted to the same sex. Every gay person I know said they were abused as a kid, went to a party and got laid with the same sex, ect... Wasn't because in Grade 1 or whatever they saw billy and wanted to be his bf.

And the advantage I see in a monarchy is that it's not a democracy. I think democracy is wack. But it's what we have, so I'll roll with it. There's more respect and honour in a land ruled under a king. There is order without it necessarily being a police state. I don't see that in modern democracy, but that could just be the entitlement society we've dug ourselves into. I get what you are saying but to give power of a nation to one man or one woman is to risky. Look at history how many bad leaders they were. Now a days if a PM or President wants to do something he needs majority approval from the elected members.

each system has pros and cons. I was thinking the other day if they is another option other then monarchy and democracy. I couldn't

There are actually some decent Conservative candidates, but not as many as there should be, or even compared to the other parties.

I'm not a fan of the alternatives, but the Conservatives do need a shakeup. This is true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put your political correctness aside for one moment and look at reality. One of my best friends growing up was gay, and it was really really really hard on him and his family. Poor bastard tried to kill himself. Some people aren't that strong and it's a possible alternative solution to facing that kinda pain.

This has nothing to do with political correctness. The only reason it's 'really hard on him and his family' is because of narrow minded, homophobic people.

"This above all: to thine own self be true..."

A person can not and should not feel forced by small minded factions of society, to change their sexual orientation any more than I can/should stop being short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A person can not and should not feel forced by small minded factions of society, to change their sexual orientation any more than I can/should stop being short.

Who said anything about forcing? If they want help, we should help them. If not, we shouldn't ostracize them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not something that can/should be 'helped'!

Who are you to decide? It takes a strong individual to come out, not everyone can pull that off.

Anyway back to the topic, I don't care if the entire Conservative party clubs baby seals on their spare time, if they put more money in my pocket, they get a big read checkmark on my ballot.

Earth first!!!!

We can drill the other planets later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who are you to decide? It takes a strong individual to come out, not everyone can pull that off.

Anyway back to the topic, I don't care if the entire Conservative party clubs baby seals on their spare time, if they put more money in my pocket, they get a big read checkmark on my ballot.

Earth first!!!!

We can drill the other planets later.

Why....why do you people still answer to LB?

I mean seriously he answers with stuff like this and you still try to corner him in to critical debate

Some of you just like to argue I guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another wtf Con candidate moment...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/conservative-candidate-tells-voter-to-renounce-heritage-over-bill-c-24-concerns-1.3260212

What the Con candidate did was pretty in violation of the Human Rights Act of Canada.

It would seem that Bill C-24 is worse than we could have imagined when it's being used by government officials as a form of 'polite ethnic cleansing.'

The Conservatives make me sick.

What?

The guy is concerned that his daughters will be forced to go to Nigeria if he gets convicted of terrorism or some other serious crime. Then he shouldn't commit any of those crimes.

The candidate basically said if you don't like the law, you can leave. Violation of rights? Please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...