A case in point. In Alberta at a small college, their athletics department booked Wayne Gretzky to speak at their annual fundraising breakfast for their athletics programmes.

Gretzky will be the keynote speaker at the 10th annual RDC Kings and Queens Scholarship Breakfast, March 28 at the Parkland Pavilion at Westerner Park.

The breakfast is the No. 1 fundraiser for the college’s athletic scholarship program.

Now according to sources Gretzky charges are $100k per event. So the athletics department set about selling tickets at some pretty high prices based on this speaker’s drawing potential.

Tickets for the breakfast go on sale Monday. They’re $199 for a single breakfast ticket and $999 for a table of eight. There will also be a meet and greet following the breakfast, which is at 7:30 a.m.. Tickets are $999 each. There will also be a VIP tables available, which includes eight breakfast and eight meet and greet tickets, for $7,999.

And apparently a crap load of cash was raised for the programme and its athletes.

More than 1,400 people jammed into the Parkland Pavilion to hear National Hockey League royalty talk hockey. The event tally will be released sometime next week.

But Hansen did say that $350,000 worth of donations to the Athletic Leadership Fund. Money raised from the event will go into funding student athletic scholarships.

This is money that the programme and charity would otherwise not have had and guess what?

Keith Hansen, RDC’s director of athletics, said this was the most successful scholarship breakfast in college history.

How can that be? I mean great organisation, a good speaker and a profit was made and the speaker was paid too but according to the latest from the PMO this is impossible and the speaker should have done it for nothing.

I guess this illustrates just how out of touch the modern right are with the business realities of raising cash for charities and education. In a country where the greedy don’t want to pay taxes but expect services to just happen this kind of thing is a necessity and those paid speakers are a requirement.

“I don’t know why he wouldn’t do it for free even before he was an MP. He didn’t charge the Liberals to do speeches at their partisan events,”

He is also a bit of a dissembler (posh word for liar)

“Why charge charities and not-for-profits, especially when they are losing money, based on his professional ability to draw crowds?”

It is not the speaker’s responsibility to advertise the event, it’s the organisers. But the truth has never got in the way of a swift jab to the ribs in Harper land.

My advice to any prospective students thinking of Georgian College is think hard about if you want to attend an institution that is happy to be part of a Harper dirty tricks campaign that is full of lies and innuendo. Also remember they don’t appear to understand what “honouring a contract” means.

UNLESS they are being used in a nefarious manner by the PMO just like the rest of us are. The ball is in your court Georgian are you complicit or a PMO victim?

A: To raise money for their good causes.

Q: Why do they pay people to speak at these events? Doesn’t that cut into their profits?

A: It does, but the idea is that the more high profile the speaker, the more people will want to listen to them. Also they will be willing to pay more for that privilege too. This means that while the initial outlay might be higher so will the rewards accrued. Remember any money brought in after costs have been paid is money the charity would not have had if the event hadn’t occurred.

Q: Why don’t the speakers do it for free?

A: Basically the same reason most of us work for money, to live. But there is the added reason that they know that their hosts are using them to make even more money. It’s a symbiotic relationship where everyone wins.

Q: How many charities do this?

A: A heck of a lot. From schools to athletic departments to hospitals it is a major way of raising funds.

Q: In the case of Trudeau, how come this one charity failed miserably at it when all the others appear to have done well?

A: Good question. They do have a Harper Conservative on the Board and given how the Harper Gov have run the country into the ground it is no surprise that someone of a similar mind has messed up so royally too.

Dean slags off a witness in the ongoing Elections Canada case against him in exactly the same manner with exactly the same protection and even less evidence. If one ever needed any more evidence of just how scummy the modern Conservative has become under Harper this is it.

Elections Canada “would have found some concerning details, facts that I was able to assemble in a matter of a couple of hours, facts that are in some cases public record, facts that I provided to Elections Canada for its consideration many months ago,” Del Mastro said.

He did not provide more information about these “concerning details” but in a TV interview last week, he noted that Hall had commenced a small-claims action against him. The case was later abandoned.

Hall has written to the Speaker and Harper asking for help in this matter.

Hall asks the Speaker to protect him from further attacks, “so that I, and other witnesses can continue to carry out our legal duty to comply with subpoenas and to cooperate with public investigations of national importance, without fear of persecution or reprisal.”

Given Scheer’s record in areas that cause the government some embarrassment no matter what crimes they have committed, good luck sir.

Del Mastro said in an email Monday that “parliamentary precedence in this matter is clear and absolute,” and quoted former Speaker Jean Sauve, who stated that attacks on a member of Parliament can prevent MPs from performing their duties since they may expose the MP to “hatred, contempt or ridicule.”

No Deano it isn’t attacks on you that will expose you to “hatred, contempt and ridicule,” it is those gutless attacks by you that will do that.

Once more I ask you to say exactly what you said in the HoC outside the HoC. Until you do, I’m just going to carry on thinking the worst about you.

Judith Baxter is a director of the Grace Foundation and was appointed as a trustee on the Board of the Canadian Museum of Civilisation by James Moore, the Harper Minister of Heritage. (Tip Lautens)

And it also appears that Judith Baxter is chuffed to be admitted into the very epicentre of dodgy cheques, dirty tricks and digging the PM out of the mire, the PMO.(Tip Tanas)

Now I’m not saying there was a quid pro quo because unlike Brad Wall I have no evidence to suggest that. But it is clear Judith is in with those (her homies in the PMO and at the dept Heritage) at the top of this government and the fact that her charity started this ruckus is a glaring coincidence.

I hope for the sake of her charity that Judith didn’t involve them in any political sheananigans, because that would be an abuse of their charitable status. That might have some serious ramifications in terms of the charity continuing to be tax exempt.

UPDATE

Apparently any search for the Church Homes Charitable Foundation Inc on the CRA site is now doomed to failure. (At 01:00hrs 17/6/13)

Now lets see how we can apply his own standards to “Kevin Rudd love child” and “pretender to the Harper throne” Brad Wall. Not long ago Wall popped off to the meeting of the Bilderberg group. But being the far-sighted, plan ahead sneaky little weasel he is he apparently thought, “how would I attack me if I was the anti-me?” Smart thinking and clearly he drew up a list of what ifs.

Wall acknowledged he won’t be able to discuss specific details from the meeting. But the premier said that’s why the Saskatchewan Party is paying for the trip — not taxpayers.

Very clever but you forgot one thing, the Premier of Sask is on duty all the time, so that means that you were collecting your salary. And while you thought you were being clever in your strategy

“.. added if taxpayers were footing the travel bill, it would not be appropriate for him to limit his report on what was said.

You weren’t being that smart were you?

You could have booked off on holiday, but given that you didn’t mention that in your “ethical” declaration above I doubt that you did. So while you were on the public dime you went abroad to attend a swish weekend hob-nobbing with foreigners comprising of the world’s powerful having already agreed to not report back to those who pay you.

Hmm would you have accepted that from any other public servant? Given your reaction to Trudeau’s payment for real, actual, signed contractual work I would doubt it. So how will you reimburse the people of Sask for your expensive sojourn sitting at the kids table at the Bilderberg jamboree?

Cash or cheque little man?

The foundation hired Mr. Trudeau for a fundraising event through his speaking agency, Speakers Spotlight, for $20,000 (plus HST).

Sounds fair to me. We’ll pay you to speak at our event, contract arranged and agreed upon. Everyone’s happy. Ah apparently not.

In the event, the charity incurred a $21,000 loss.

Was Mr Trudeau responsible for advertising the event or selling tickets? Apparently not.

Did the charity speak to Trudeau immediately after the event?

A spokeswoman for Mr. Trudeau said Friday the Grace Foundation did not complain until nearly a year after the event (in fact, Ms. Buck’s letter was sent last March; the event was the previous June).

Nope. And

“Mr. Trudeau fulfilled all obligations within his contract,” she said. “Any fees and any other issues associated with these engagements were negotiated by Speakers’ Spotlight completely separate from Mr. Trudeau’s duties and activities as a member of parliament.”

But some how Harper butt kisser John Ivison managed to denigrate a person for doing his job and being paid for it. It’s astounding that Jason Kenney, Harper hand puppet Pollievre and the arse Ivison have gone this route, but they have chosen this path of their own accord. The fun we can have with this meme will be endless. But one question I’d like to put to the bozo MPs and the shill would be “are the Harper government responsible for paying back all that tax relief on donations to them and their salaries, now they’ve created massive debt for the country?”

No seriously, we’ve lost a lot of cash thanks to Harper and Co and their enablers and supporters like Ivison; so isn’t it only fair that they return their salaries and any other income they’ve gotten from their positions in order to make up for their gross stupidity and ineptitude?

The Quebec Soccer Federation said Friday it welcomed the news “with enthusiasm and relief.” It said it had been waiting for clear instructions from FIFA. However, the Quebec body has not said exactly what it will do next.

Quebec soccer has no place “waiting for FIFA to clarify” anything, they do as their national association instructs them to do. They are not a national association but FIFA has now treated them like one. Who says bigotry isn’t rewarded, it shouldn’t be but FIFA has done just that.

Wait until the next time these petty jackasses want to get their hate on FIFA, you have enabled some very stupid, spiteful people and you will regret this in the future.

EC responded,

Elections Canada maintains that the full cost must be counted so that it’s fair to new candidates, who don’t have the benefit of previously used signs.

So in a race with budget caps any incumbent would receive an advantage in terms of number of signs in total if they could write of part of the cost of old signs. In order to prevent this inbuilt advantage EC said no way. Sounds pretty fair and unvendetta like so far, but it does raise a question in my mind. “If you thought you could use signs in this way, why would you not check with the policing body first?” Doing it and then trying to argue after the fact is never a good way of going about anything.

It’s not clear how Little assessed the value of the signs. In a July 2012 letter to Elections Canada, he said the small signs used by the campaign were worth $1 each and the large signs $10.

Elections Canada recorded the commercial value at $6.77 for the small signs and $39.55 for the large ones, for a difference of $8,612.43.

And whipping figures out of your butt never works either. Honestly these guys are unbelievable in their idiocy. EC is a little more hard nosed than that and demands greater accountability than that found in the Senate. Perhaps more telling is the fact that Watson’s agent doesn’t think they should pay their phone bill either.

In a letter to an Elections Canada official, Little said the agency should deny any attempt by the phone company to collect what it’s owed.

“I believe it should be denied as there is no excuse for them not being able to locate me for 16 months.”

And it also beggars belief that a man claiming persecution and the ability to change prices on a whim should be so ignorant of what should and should not be included in Election returns.

After Elections Canada told Little the campaign had gone over its limit, Little tried to revoke the change that added the phone bill to remove the $5,765.71 from the campaign’s spending records.

An official with the agency responded that it didn’t matter whether the campaign had paid the bill or not, since the services were used.

It seems to me that EC’s action are far from on a vendetta and the whole thing could be laid at the feet of all the MPs involved and their campaign workers. Their unbelievable arrogance and hubris is stunning.

As three campaigns are involved in this “price of signs” scam, what is the betting that this was cooked up centrally to try and push the envelope on election law?

Apparently it’s not he biggest scandal on the order book this week so we should just forget about it. It’s the Harper government grasping a t straws etc. Yup both those statements are correct, but gate security exists for a reason and given the all encompassing nature of that reason you do not want to get it wrong.

Yeah we all know Tom. Tom’s a good guy and is leader of the opposition he’s no terrorist. Again you are correct he isn’t, but people do strange things when their family is threatened. Proxy bombers in N Ireland back in the troubles were a real problem and also an effective way to target a location.

According to the widow of the civilian victim, Patsy Gillespie, he was ordered by IRA gunmen to drive a car packed with an estimated 1,000 pounds of explosives into the Londonderry border post about 4 a.m. Gillespie and five soldiers were killed, and 10 people were injured.

Notice these explosions happened at the gate in Western countries and were carried out by non-muslims. Security at important locations is there for a reason and it serves an important purpose because you can’t afford to fuck up even a little bit.

UPDATE

It’s worse than I thought, the RCMP are not doing their jobs.

“Basically, what happened this morning is I did what I do every single morning when I come to Parliament. I go to the same gate, I wave to the people who are on duty and then I just drive slowly, being careful, up to my (Centre Block) office.”

Seriously? The Bad Boys do watch for exactly this kind of refusal to take security seriously and use it to their advantage. Jesus wept I’m surprised that something tragic hasn’t happened already. Everyone should be stopped and checked.

Back when I was a kid it was very common for my dad to check wheel arches and under the car before getting in and starting the engine. He also wound down the windows before turning the ignition too. Today with the use of IEDs that are remotely detonated, how easy would it be to put something in or under Mulcair’s car and have him deliver it to the Cemtre Block for you?

Sudden changes in routine and doing security properly foil terrorists. But we settle for body scanners, throwing away water and taking your shoes off at the airport in order to give the impression of safety.

Unbelievable.