CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, A REMINDER

It is pretty simple to me. You follow the rules. You make some debates sparkle. You help your constituents, and you protect their rights. You stay on the high ground.

1. The purposes of this Code are to

(a) maintain and enhance public confidence and trust in the integrity of Members as well as the respect and confidence that society places in the House of Commons as an institution;

Principles

2. Given that service in Parliament is a public trust, the House of Commons recognizes and declares that Members are expected

(a) to serve the public interest and represent constituents to the best of their abilities;

(b) to fulfill their public duties with honesty and uphold the highest standards so as to avoid real or apparent conflicts of interests, and maintain and enhance public confidence and trust in the integrity of each Member and in the House of Commons;

(c) to perform their official duties and functions and arrange their private affairs in a manner that bears the closest public scrutiny, an obligation that may not be fully discharged by simply acting within the law;

(d) to arrange their private affairs so that foreseeable real or apparent conflicts of interest may be prevented from arising, but if such a conflict does arise, to resolve it in a way that protects the public interest; and

(e) not to accept any gift or benefit connected with their position that might reasonably be seen to compromise their personal judgment or integrity except in accordance with the provisions of this Code.


4. The provisions of this Code apply to conflicts of interest of all Members of the House of Commons when carrying out the duties and functions of their office as Members of the House, including Members who are ministers of the Crown or parliamentary secretaries.

Using influence

9. A Member shall not use his or her position as a Member to influence a decision of another person so as to further the Member'’s private interests or those of a member of his or her family, or to improperly further another personÂ’s private interests.


Prohibition: gifts and other benefits

14.(1) Neither a Member or any member of a Member'’s family shall accept, directly or indirectly, any gift or other benefit, except compensation authorized by law, that is related to the Member'’s position.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

I have been very upset over this Bulte affair. She has been exposed as the political driver to bring in a US style DMCA to Canadian copyright law, an experience along the way typified by stonewall responses to intelligent questions, that retrospectively make scents.

With the SONY Rootkit experience not having made a shift in the policy stance of the Liberal Party, from the recent responses CIPPIC received, it makes you wonder if this law is paid for already.

She is and remains unappologetic: "I'm not being influenced by them. They're supporting me," she said. "These people have become my friends and I don't apologize for that."

Its obvious that she seems to think she is wearing a form of hubric "electoral teflon"(TM), and that none of this will stick to her or her supporters. That a new spin can makes things better => the "fundraiser" by the copyright interests is now termed a "celebration" with all proceeds going to ?????

In my opinion, this corruption is going to stain Canada's reputation more than the stain it is getting by being listed in the piracy tables that the IFRI itself shows Canada as having the same rate of "piracy" as the United States in their most recent report on piracy, less than 10%. 57 countries are worse than Canada in their on piracy tables, and no less than 15 are ranked equally.

Why are they picking on us? Because they can with fluff ball stories like the one by Mark Evans, and fluffy politicians I suppose floating around too, afraid of seizing a live one here and taking the case farther than the media has cared to take it, to date.

The pressure on "friends" by the CRIA through the IFRI now seems to have voided some common sense on the optics here. A report by one blessed to live in the riding says that well they know they look bad. Big time.

The stain is there. And growing.

With friends of friends publishing drivel that harms the reputation of your country, you got to examine your friendships, particularly if you are a MP.

Will the electorate do the deed? Stay tuned. The day is fast approaching.