I mean, as long as Gerard Kennedy and Martha Hall Findlay are being paid by the Liberal Party of Canada and not taxpayers (expect $1.75/vote/year, damn that stupid law) then it is an internal matter.
...There are whispers that the two are receiving as much as $15,000 a month, which would be $180,000 a year. Some other Liberals believe their salaries are only about $100,000 a year.
Bob Rae, who placed third in the leadership convention and remained neutral on the last ballot, is not receiving a salary from the party for his work on the election platform. He said that he is spending “a fair bit” of time on it but is still keeping up his consulting, mediating and public-speaking business.
And I agree with Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Hall Findlay here
...He said, however, that his current Liberal job was “not the best offer I had.”
“It's a good position in that it's something I'm doing that is useful,” he said. “I was reluctant to take something on for exactly this reason. ... I had better offers both financially and situationally I'd be able to stay in Toronto ... but there is a job to be done and I'm happy to be part of it.”
He said people can speculate all they want about his salary, adding that he didn't ask for any particular amount.
Mr. Kennedy also said that he turned down an offer to serve on Mr. Dion's transition team.
Ms. Hall Findlay said she gave up “more lucrative opportunities to do this work for the party on this short term basis. ...”
Update: The more I think about this
...The lack of transparency is causing concern among some Liberals and leading to speculation that private deals were made because Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Hall Findlay were the two leadership candidates who dropped off the ballot early and threw significant support behind Stéphane Dion.
the more I ask why this became a story. Who are the "some Liberals"? Are they from Bob Rae camp who are upset that their man is not getting paid as well? As they from Ignatieff's camp still bitter that their man did not win?
Comments (14)
What the heck is an “internal matter”? It’s interesting news. It’s public now. If it were true that Dion enticed other candidates to support him by promising monetary favours, that reflects poorly on him as a potential PM. Fair game. Same goes for everybody, Liberal or otherwise.
Posted by Alan | March 1, 2007 9:10 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 09:10
Two things:
First, by trying to cover it up it reminds people of sponsorship scandal. Someone should ask them if they are getting paid by cheque or by envelopes of cash!
Second, it looks like Kennedy is getting paid off for supporting Dion, which in itself is bad, but it also supports the theory that ethno-politics was behind the flip-flop on the anti-terror vote.
Posted by Steve M | March 1, 2007 9:48 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 09:48
I don’t think the thrust of the article was that they shouldn’t be paid by the LPC for “work” but, rather, just what tit-for-tat got them this “work”.
Posted by Erik Sorenson | March 1, 2007 9:54 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 09:54
The problem isn’t where the money is coming from, but the perceived deal-making (be it from job offers or vote buying or cash in brown envelopes). The fact is that there is a question of SD winning because of promises made.
How typical Liberal!
Posted by Alberta Girl | March 1, 2007 10:01 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 10:01
And Bob Rae gets nothing.
Because he has the insignificant job of developing the Lib party platform?
Libs are reinforcing the theory that ‘deals’ bought Dion the leadership. The knives are out!
Posted by wilson61 | March 1, 2007 10:15 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 10:15
Josee Verner was also paid, as was Lawrence Cannon. There is no story here.
Frankly, Harper could use people of Kennedy and Hall-Findlay’s capabilities on his team. Martha H-F, especially.
Posted by Anonymous | March 1, 2007 10:23 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 10:23
Oh, there’s a story here all right! It’s the continuation of sleaze by the Libranos. Those who should be REALLY pissed at this are those who bought Liberal memberships…it’s their money being wasted.
Posted by Anonymous | March 1, 2007 10:48 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 10:48
Anon, it is Liberals making the story here. Liberals concerned with the lack of transparency within their party.
We are but amused spectators to the Liberals trashing their own, again, as usual.
Posted by wilson61 | March 1, 2007 11:36 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 11:36
Dion’s backroom deals for power leverage ethnicity, money, terrorism, etc. etc. Is there any thing Liberals wouldn’t do in their pursuit of raw power over Canadians? It sure doesn’t seem like it.
Posted by philanthropist | March 1, 2007 11:45 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 11:45
The ATA vote was payoff to Bains and Alghabra, this is payoff to Kennedy and MHF.
Anybody who denies backroom deals took place is lying.
Posted by colin | March 1, 2007 11:51 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 11:51
It is with much sadness that Chester has to make the following announcement:
Greg Staples is wrong.
The specter of buying off competitors as a means to achieving power, transcends internal party politics. It goes to the very root of our democratic processes, and potentially forshadows a return to the very dark days of Liberal political corruption (a return, or perhaps a continuation).
Posted by Chester | March 1, 2007 11:54 AM
Posted on March 1, 2007 11:54
Lord knows both Kennedy and MHF could of got a better deal elsewhere… like for one if they had supported Rae…
Posted by Dan McKenzie | March 1, 2007 12:39 PM
Posted on March 1, 2007 12:39
czasu bqopflj twrfo iaovp wbshvtxd wvxdkq glsze
Posted by vjykcx vkiys | March 4, 2007 7:39 PM
Posted on March 4, 2007 19:39
qimcrknel vafijprz itxnyaw oywtnm knmpdb cvzl xgowf rcwye vahjr
Posted by livkzr tamhxw | March 4, 2007 7:40 PM
Posted on March 4, 2007 19:40