Author: admin

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is a few hours away from leaving Paris, France after arriving here Thursday night (left). This Paris trip followed a day-trip to London, England.

Harper met with the leaders of each country as part of his pre-G8/G20 summit consensus-building tour.

In Paris today, Harper started the day with a late-morning visit at the Palace Élysée with French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Reporters were treated to a photo opp of Harper's arrival, a greeting from Sarkozy, and 30 seconds in their meeting room before being whisked to the Hôtel Matignon, the official residence of the French prime minister. The current occupant is François Fillon.

Reporters were treated to a similar photo opp — Harper's arrival, Fillon greeting — but, at the end of the hour-long meeting of the prime ministers, the pair emerged for a press conference. (Sarkozy did not speak to reporters after his meeting with Harper, continuing a tradition that his predecessor, Jacques Chirac, established leaving his PM Dominic de Villepin to talk to reporters.

As has become customary for press conferences involving Harper and foreign leaders, the press corps of each country was afforded one question each. For our part, we asked Harper about Liberal MP's Bob Rae's musings earlier this week that the Liberal Party could see a post-2011 Afghanistan mission that involved keeping Canadian troops in that country [Read the story about his response] and we asked him about the battle between Canada and many European countries, including France, over the issue of a global bank tax [Read that story here].

The French press corps asked a first question which must have delighted Canada's prime minister: Given the fact that Canada's federal government is in the best fiscal shape of the G8, what can France learn from Canada. The second question from the French press was for Fillon alone, about the fall of the euro and the ongoing currency crisis.

Prime MInister Stephen Harper is in London, England today, having lunch, as I write this, with Prime Minister David Cameron. Both Cameron and Harper are Conservatives but Cameron does not lead a Conservative government: he leads a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats. Harper said he and Cameron talked about that during a morning meeting they had. After that meeting, they held a joint press conference and Canadian reporters asked about coalition governments, given Canada's experience with the failed Liberal-NDP coalition proposal of early 2009. Here's what he had to say:

“David and I were discussing this — I think the debate in Britain was instructive. There was an interesting period of a few days when people discussed the various constitutional issues that were involved and the various constitutional options but I think in the end, the verdict of public opinion was pretty clear which was that losers don't get to form coalitions. Winners are the ones who form governments. Obviously, David was able to form an innovative arrangement to give Britain I suspect the kind of arrangement it needs to deal with the kind of budgetary challenges that face the country. But I say in the end, the coalition in Britain — I think it's important to point out — was formed by the party that won the election and, of course, this coalition in Britain doesn't contain a party dedicated to the breakup of the country. And these were the two problems in Canada. The proposition by my opposition was to form a coalition for the purposes of excluding the aprty that won the election and for the purposes of including a party dedicated to breaking up the country. I do think [Cameron's coalition] has some instructions for Canada.”

Click through here to listen to Harper and to hear David Cameron's reaction to the question:

A Christian group, El Shafie Ministries, recently asked, through the Conservatives, if a large card “Support Our Troops” could be placed in the House of Commons lobbies for MPs to sign.

The Conservatives had the agreement of all parties to do this and many MPs from all parties have, over the last couple of days, signed the card.

Conservative MP Rob Anders, though, signed it this way; “If in doubt, pull the trigger. Rob Anders, Calgary West” (See pic, left, obtained by Canwest News Service)

MP from all parties, including Defence Minister Peter MacKay, have criticized Anders for saying it was an inappropriate thing to say.

“Anders could have picked a million other things to write,” said NDP MP Peter Stoffer. Prime Minister Stephen Harper signed the card, saying “You're the best.” Defence Minister Peter MacKay wrote, “You all make us very proud. You are our Team Canada. Thank you for your service. Come home safe.”

Yesterday, as my Calgary Herald colleague Jason Fekete reported, Anders apologized.

Meanwhile, at their weekly House Leaders meeting, NDP House Leader Yvon Godin asked Conservative House Leader Jay Hill that Anders name be removed from the card before it is sent on to the troops. Hill not only agreed but said his message would also be removed.

Justice Jeffrey Oliphant was appointed on June 12, 2008 by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to conduct an inquirty ito certain allegations respecting the business and financial dealings between Karl Heinz Schreiber and former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. Oliphant sat through 39 days of public hearings, including several days with Mulroney himself on the stand, heard from 28 witnesses, waded through 5,000 pages of transcripts and reviewed 150,000 pages of documentary evidence.

His report is released today. It includes a 67-page executive summary, a 400-page Factual Summary, a 382-page volume on policy and consolidated findings and recommendations; and a 137-page review of independent research studies.

The bottom line to all of this is neatly summed up by Oliphant at the beginning of the executive summary:

The genesis of this Inquiry is a relationship between a former prime minister of Canada, the Right Honourable Brian Mulroney, and Karlheinz Schreiber, a German-Canadian businessman. The relationship spanned two decades and included a secret agreement between the two men made approximately two months after Mr. Mulroney left the office of prime minister and was sitting as a member of parliament. For many years Mr. Mulroney concealed the fact that, on three separate occasions, in three different hotels in two countries, he had received thousands of dollars in cash, in envelopes, from Mr. Schreiber. There was no contemporary documentation, as is normally found in legitimate business dealings, for any of these transactions. No invoices or receipts were provided, no correspondence or reporting letters were written. I conclude that the covert manner in which Mr. Mulroney and Mr. Schreiber carried out their transactions was designed to conceal their business and financial dealings.

Mr. Mulroney accepted the first instalment of cash on August 27, 1993, while he was still a sitting member of parliament, and the other two instalments on December 18, 1993, and December 8, 1994. He had several opportunities to disclose these dealings – when he filed his tax forms between 1993 and 1999, for instance; when he gave evidence under oath in his lawsuit against the Government of Canada in 1996; and when he or his spokespersons were interviewed by various journalists – but he chose not to do so. Instead, at all times he attempted to prevent the public disclosure of his dealings with Mr. Schreiber.

…This Inquiry provided Mr. Mulroney with the opportunity to clear the air and put forward cogent, credible evidence to support his assertions that there was nothing untoward about his dealings with Mr. Schreiber. I regret that he has not done so. I express this regret on behalf of all Canadians, who are entitled to expect their politicians to conserve and enhance public confidence and trust in the integrity, objectivity, and impartiality of government. Mr. Mulroney’s actions failed to enhance public confidence in the integrity of public office holders.