Daughter-in-Law From Hell!

When the nickname 'Duchess of Pork' was assigned to Sarah Ferguson some time ago, I fear few of us understood just how accurate it was. She does love the trough. She translated bodyweight-gain into big cash with various corporations, especially Weight-Watchers. Now, poor baby is broke! I am glad at least some of it is owed to law firms but, alas, they will get first crack if mater-in-law decides to bail her out, again. 'Randy Andy' doesn't seem to be hard up but will be unhappy that his already somewhat blemished reputation is smudged by her behaviour. One can bet that our monarch, with a most colourful group of in-laws, sees "Fergie" as the "daughter-in-law from hell!"

Brits are such a curious lot in many ways. Sarah receives an annual allowance, for nothing, something most of them would envy. Yet still, they come running to this woman's aid (although not with a cheque in hand) and suggest that she has not committed fraud and that the Queen should help her. If she accepted $40,000 in cash from someone and, in exchange, promised that person access to Prince Andrew, (although both have admitted that he was not involved) and that ain't fraud, what is? But she is "distantly" related to the royal elite and won't go to jail.

She should certainly have the grace to retire from all those charities she allows to use her name. One has to wonder: how many pay for her patronage? "Noblesse oblige". * Indeed.


(*"Privilege entails responsibility.")

Oink! Oink!

Very little is sacred these days. As Cole Porter would have put it, "Anything goes!" Since the Jaffer affair, lobbying has become a hot topic. Nevertheless, no one appears to object to lobbying, in one form or another. It is baffling! In our democracies, Ottawa's Parliament, the USA's Congress or the British House of Commons and House of Lords, it is not a violation to "persuade" people in power to sway their decisions. Persuasion for profit? Influence peddling? More like bribery - and viewed as criminal - outside politics.

What of party politics? Good? Sound? Honest? The great Winston Churchill changed parties twice. In those good old days a child of the elite went to Eton or Harrow; Oxford or Cambridge; short stint in the Grenadier or Coldstream Guards and then...decided which of the parties offered the best chance of a job! Jean Charest is a Conservative. He ran for the federal Conservative leadership in 1993 and lost to Kim Campbell, who got trounced in her first, and only, election. So, Jean became a provincial Liberal and is now Premier of Quebec with three consecutive minority election wins.

Then there is the matter of how many "jobs" an elected Member of Parliament, etc., can hold/manage. If s/he is a lawyer, it is acceptable to continue to practice. Run a construction company, you do not have to quit that job, or sell the company, to work serving the people!

The last straw happened yesterday. The Auditor-General, Sheila Fraser, courteously made a request to audit the expense accounts of the MPs, et al. The members of all parties, (about to embark on a seven-day sojourn of R and R) ran for the exits to avoid the press, and the reply to the A-G was, "No!" Such arrogance is appalling. Who the hell is in charge in Canada? Does the A-G need to ask? The figures spent by parliamentarians, reported by the CBC, is half a billion...that's right, billion dollars. Surely such a huge sum has to qualify for audit. That the members were reluctant to submit is immediately suspect.

The whole rotten bag-of-tricks needs replacing. I don't mean by electing Michael Ignatieff as P.M. That would be more of the same. We urgently require a national enquiry to determine EXACTLY what the duties of Members of Parliament, and their flunkies, hangers-on, lobbyists, etc., etc. are. What, EXACTLY, are their job descriptions, responsibilities, vacation periods (including periods of proroguing) salaries, extras (especially the extras). It won't happen, you say? You are probably right but until we, the voters, tell them what we will accept, you can bet your breeches the greed element in  them will go unchecked. The oinking 'on the Hill' has become deafening....

Suicide Bomb!

What strong people we Canadians are. We tolerate Stephen H, our Prime Minister, and long for a saviour for our enviable heritage. What do we get? Michael Ignatieff! We have Jack Layton and the wonderful Elizabeth May. But the former is ... "socialist" i.e. Lenin, and too intelligent and sincere for for most of us. Ms. May got a million votes last election but not a sausage in the form of seats. That's not much encouragement to vote Green next time, I fear. Political reform is essential! 

Mr. Ignatieff has announced that the current Governor-General, Michaelle Jean, should have her period of office extended for another term. What is this poor man on? The Governor-General is an honorary position and is none of Mister Ignatieff's business. I read some of his books and they are quite good but he has no knack for politics. His knack is for making odd utterances which just about seal his political fate. By the way, who really cares about a Governor-General. Is one necessary? Not, in the view of most Canadians.