07-06-2005 11:01									#481
	Tired of ads?

Your reading of the Criminal Code is obviously overbroad and would be laughed out of a courtroom on its face.

Otherwise the very concept of a coalition government (formal coalition, that is) can be tossed out the window.

What else would you call offering cabinet posts to the leadership of an opposing party in order to get that party's support in commons?

	07-06-2005 11:02									#482
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Jerry Jerry!

JM

	07-06-2005 11:03									#483
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

it seems like the Canucks are trying to give the Brits a run for the money..

JM

	07-06-2005 11:04									#484
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse Your reading of the Criminal Code is obviously overbroad and would be laughed out of a courtroom on its face. Otherwise the very concept of a coalition government (formal coalition, that is) can be tossed out the window. What else would you call offering cabinet posts to the leadership of an opposing party in order to get that party's support in commons?

Sigh.

Making a coalition to govern is quite a bit different from trying to influence a single vote by a single MP through the use of inducements.

The former is Parliamentary norm, the later is corruption of a public official.

	07-06-2005 11:11									#485
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Their stupidity, and lack of respect for Parliament, knows no bounds.

Had Murphy said to Grewal, 'come on over, we always knew you had the right stuff. Help us govern the country from your new seat in cabinet' there would have been no offence.

Instead, they focused the conversation on that one vote, and things that might happen a few weeks later if the vote went their way.

The hypothetical conversation has no problem with the law. The real conversation most certainly does.

	07-06-2005 11:14									#486
	Tired of ads?

There's no difference whatsoever.

MPs are directly accountable to the Canadian people. Their actions in Parliament in exchange for appointments which are dependent on their ability to remain MPs are matters on which their constituents must have the final say. It's not a matter for the courts and the police, but one for the electorate.

Appointment to a post such as the head of Via Rail or ambassador to France over which the Canadian people cannot exercise such direct control (or the offering of a sum of money, or any other such action) is corruption.

You're the one drawing the fine lines here, NYE. It's okay to do it to members of your own party or for entire other parties, but not for individual MPs? I thought you were the one who was all for greater importance of the individual MP in parliament...

	07-06-2005 11:21									#487
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I am. I am also very much against the ability of a government to prolong its putrid rule through the use of patronage towards opposition MPs.

And yes, an expicit quid pro quo for a vote on a single bill is against the law. That's what the Criminal Code says.

	07-06-2005 11:23									#488
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

You ask a judge, how would you rule in this type of case? She answers, you confirm her.

No problem.

You ask a judge, how will you vote on my brother-in-laws case that's before you right now? She tells you to get stuffed. You use your position on a committee to stall her appointment to the SCoC.

You just broke the law, Jack.

	07-06-2005 11:33									#489
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

It might be telling that corruption of judges and MPs is handled in the same section.

You think that influencing a judge in a specific case should be OK under some circumstances?

	07-06-2005 11:39									#490
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Mr. Judge, don't you consider xyz to be a Charter issue? He answers. He gets appointed, or not.

Fair ball.

Mr. Judge, don't you think you really should find xyz to be a Charter issue in this case you are hearing?

*Bzzzt* Go directly to jail, or at the very least resign from the government.

	07-06-2005 11:42									#491
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Mr. MP, don't you find that you agree with us on all these issues? Why not come over here and support us from a cabinet post?

Mr. MP, do you want a job of some sort three weeks from now? Vote yeah on Thursday, and the fix is in. *wink, wink*

	07-06-2005 22:38									#492
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Jon Miller it seems like the Canucks are trying to give the Brits a run for the money.. JM

Under no circumstances should you permit Gordon Brown to become Prime Minister. Nothing good will come of it.

	08-06-2005 09:02									#493
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Kontiki Latest update: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...Story/National/

You're right. The House of Cards is up in the air again.

	08-06-2005 09:48									#494
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Taping a conversation is not in the least bit illegal

Actually, taping a private conversation is illegal under Canadian Criminal Code 184.

The law allows tape recording of a conversation under specified circumstances. One of which is that the person making the tape recording must get the consent of the other person before the conversation begins.

	08-06-2005 10:22									#495
	Put an end to popups!

So we have the Liberals acting unethically, the Conservatives acting unethically.

Vote NDP.

	08-06-2005 10:34									#496
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Actually, taping a private conversation is illegal under Canadian Criminal Code 184. The law allows tape recording of a conversation under specified circumstances. One of which is that the person making the tape recording must get the consent of the other person before the conversation begins.

http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec184.html

quote: (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to (a) a person who has the consent to intercept, express or implied, of the originator of the private communication or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it

That would include the person placing or receiving the call, yes?

Thank you for playing.

	08-06-2005 10:35									#497
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

this is for the people of the sun
it's comin' back around again
this ist ror the fpeople fo the sun
it's coming back around

	08-06-2005 10:36									#498
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

sucker.

	08-06-2005 10:38									#499
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

nihgt night

	08-06-2005 10:46									#500
	Inflate your Upload Space

We are all... suckers.

The Liberals are engineering an election, gay marriage will be the cause. They are pushing several members of their own caucus into voting non confidence on the next budget vote (scheduled for next week?).

They will then go on to trounce the Tories and NDP in Ontario, and elsewhere. They will then go on to form another minority (or maybe a majority) government.

And then Duceppe will lead Quebec into a third vote, and this time it will be discredited Liberals who campaign for 'Non'. Tell me how much traction they will get.

Then seperatism in Alberta especially, but also BC, and Saskatchewn will explode onto the political landscape. There are mutterings and murmerings now. All that needs be done is predjudices be confirmed, then some firebrand picks up the torch, and BOOM!

We are all suckers if we don't see this coming from a mile away.

	08-06-2005 10:50									#501
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

500th post!!!

NYE you are too much of a pessimist. Albertan separatism is a joke. It's an idle threat and deep down you know that.

	08-06-2005 10:58									#502
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Times change, Aggy. The history you read on a cereal box is not a good guide to the future.

	08-06-2005 11:05									#503
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It ain't going to happen. Canada does not have a problem. The Liberals do not have a problem. The Conservatives have a problem: they are unelectable in their present form, and they will remain so.

If they go back to being PC style conservatives I bet you that they'd win the next election held after the end of 2006. People are sick of the Liberals, but the Tories are not offering a palatable alternative.

People in Ontario just won't go for the social conservatism. No matter what happens out west, no-one in Toronto is going to vote for that, and more importantly no-one in Quebec is going to vote for it either.

Get rid of Harper, tone down the anti-gay and morality stuff, and find a friendlier leader. Are you seriously telling me that won't work? Better to get half of what you want than spend all the time gnashing your teeth in frustration.

Add to this the fact that Harper is incompetent as a leader, as was Stockwell Day (Whoever proposed that **** for the leadership needs his head examined). The Tories should find someone from the East Coast who is nice and non-scary.

	08-06-2005 11:14									#504
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Canada does not have a problem?

Seperatism polling over 50% in Quebec and a bunch of lying, coniving Liberals who are near universally despised in Quebec our only defence?

You are sadly deluded if you think the West is the biggest concern. It should be a concern, yes, but it is not the largest.

Your hammering on the drum of social conservatism is both predictable, and tragic. It is predictable based on the coffee shop culture you are exposed to, and it is tragic that it will likely result in yet another Liberal government and the more likely dissolution of the country.

	08-06-2005 11:18									#505
	Support Apolyton

You may hate Steven Harper's soul to hell, but he is the choice of the only party that can spell the Liberals.

It must really suck to be in Ontario and not have much of a choice. I should then welcome the people of Ontario to the rest of Canada.

	08-06-2005 11:41									#506
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec184.html quote: (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to (a) a person who has the consent to intercept, express or implied, of the originator of the private communication or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it That would include the person placing or receiving the call, yes? Thank you for playing.

It is legal to record the conversation with the consent of the caller or person receiving the call, but it is illegal to disclose the conversation unless you have the consent of both parties.


CC 193
Where a private communication has been intercepted by means of an electro-magnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other device without the consent, express or implied, of the originator thereof or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it, every one who, without the express consent of the originator thereof or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it, wilfully

[Above boils down to: if you do not have the consent of the caller or the receiver]

(a) uses or discloses the private communication or any part thereof or the substance, meaning or purport thereof or of any part thereof, or

(b) discloses the existence thereof,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

	08-06-2005 11:49									#507
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

You really don't have a clue, do you?

The people in the call did the taping and the releasing. Nothing was 'intercepted'.

You are chasing red herrings.

	08-06-2005 11:56									#508
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither You really don't have a clue, do you? The people in the call did the taping and the releasing. Nothing was 'intercepted'. You are chasing red herrings.

Intercept is the legal term for recording.

If you record your conversations, that's fine, but if you then broadcast it without the consent of the other person then you're breaking the law.

For journalists, they must, by law, get the consent, explicit or implied, of a person before recording a conversation if that conversation is going to be broadcast. If you talk into a microphone, then your consent is implied. If a reporter tapes a telephone call then the person being interviewed must give explicit consent.

Grewal was taping a telephone call, legal, but by not getting the prior consent of the other party, he was breaking the law when he released the tapes. Of course, the Liberals can't ask for charges for political reason, but that doesn't change the fact that what Grewal did was illegal.

	08-06-2005 12:07									#509
	Support Apolyton

quote: without the consent, express or implied, of the originator thereof or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it... every one who, without the express consent of the originator thereof or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it, wilfully...

	08-06-2005 12:29									#510
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai For journalists, they must, by law, get the consent, explicit or implied, of a person before recording a conversation if that conversation is going to be broadcast. If you talk into a microphone, then your consent is implied. If a reporter tapes a telephone call then the person being interviewed must give explicit consent.

How do you explain hidden camera exposes on CTV and CBC in that case?

I suspect you have it wrong.