XPost: can.politics, ott.general, bc.politics   
   XPost: ont.politics   
   From: ConsRCons@govt.cda   
      
   Mulroney lied under oath in front of a judge; will Harper do the same?   
      
   I have no doubt that Duffy would implicate Harper re any 'deals'   
   involving repayment of his illegitimate expense claims.   
      
   That would leave Harper to cover his own ass in any way he could.  Even   
   under oath.   
   ____________________________________________   
      
   National Post | 13/08/16 John Ivison   
      
      
   Stephen Harper will be called as a witness if Mike Duffy expenses   
   allegations reach court: sources   
      
      
   If the RCMP investigation into Mike Duffy over alleged breach of trust   
   reaches court, the senator’s lawyers will call Stephen Harper as a   
   witness and grill the Prime Minister under oath, sources said.   
      
   This is the sort of finely drawn line you find a lot of in politics: so   
   long as you observe this rule, all other behaviour is implicitly   
   absolved — in the furthest extension, because “no crimes were committed”   
   nothing more need be said about it. Senators, then, might be excused for   
   their confusion — if that were in fact the issue. But it isn’t.   
      
   The distinction that is really at work here is not between different   
   types of partisan activities, some expensable and some not. It’s the one   
   between different types of expenses: the kind for which you file claims,   
   and the kind you draw as a salary. But this is clearly bogus. Indeed,   
   it’s no distinction at all.   
      
   Senators do not occasionally engage in partisan activity, as a departure   
   from their regular “Senate business.” Partisan activity is their   
   business. It’s what they’re paid for.   
      
   Mr. Duffy’s lawyers have barred him from speaking to the press but he   
   has told friends that he feels he has been thrown under the bus and that   
   the Conservative PR machine is out to destroy him.   
      
   Sources close to the now-Independent senator at the centre of the   
   expenses scandal said Mr. Duffy was recruited to present a “kinder,   
   softer” face to the Conservative Party in the run-up to the 2011   
   election. Friends say he was told that political appearances on the   
   Senate tab were not only tolerated, they were expected by the Prime   
   Minister.   
      
   Mr. Duffy’s case for the defence is likely to rest on public statements   
   by Mr. Harper that show he was comfortable the senator satisfied all   
   residency requirements (the RCMP alleges Mr. Duffy broke the law by   
   claiming a primary residence in Prince Edward Island, when his primary   
   residence was really in Ontario).   
      
   Back in February, Mr. Harper told the House of Commons that all   
   Conservative senators conformed with the Red Chamber’s residency   
   requirements. “That’s the basis on which they were appointed to the   
   Senate and those requirements have been clear for 150 years,” he said.   
      
   Postmedia News reported Thursday that new senators, including Mr. Duffy   
   and Pamela Wallin, were told that they could bill for certain partisan   
   travel.   
      
   Also Thursday, the auditor general confirmed he will perform a   
   comprehensive audit of the expenses of all senators.   
      
   Both developments will be welcomed by Mr. Duffy and Ms. Wallin, since it   
   seems unlikely they will be the only senators who fall foul of the   
   auditors. There are already rumblings that Liberal and Conservative   
   senators will join forces to try to limit the scope of the audit to the   
   2011 and 2012 calendar years (Mr. Duffy and Ms. Wallin’s audits went   
   back to include 2009 and 2010).   
      
   Michael Ferguson, the auditor general, met with the special Senate audit   
   committee set up to co-ordinate the investigation earlier this week.   
      
   One source suggested that Liberal members in particular are nervous that   
   new rules brought in last year may be applied retroactively – as they   
   were in the case with Mr. Duffy and Ms. Wallin — ruling offside expenses   
   that were permitted in earlier years.  The new Senate travel policy,   
   finalized in 2012, says “partisan activity related to the work of the   
   senator or Senate” would be funded by the Upper House but “purely   
   partisan matter such as election activities” would not.   
      
   The expectation of many Senate watchers is that the Prime Minister will   
   campaign to abolish the Upper House, based on the alleged transgressions   
   of Mr. Duffy and Ms. Wallin, in an attempt to wedge Justin Trudeau’s   
   Liberals, who advocate retaining a reformed Senate.   
      
   “If the provinces or the Supreme Court tries to stop him, he will looks   
   like a hero to the base,” said one senator.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)