Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

The concept that political parties’ own MPs and MLAs, elected under their banner, is abhorrent and unacceptable -- are political parties above the law

We need a national inquiry into whether political parties in the execution of their affairs are in violation of Sections 119 to 121 of the Criminal Code of Canada. 

Political parties, federal and provincial routinely tell elected members what party policies they shall promote and support ... they offer ministerial (and critic) positions on the basis that the appointed person shall support the party in all things ... and they require elected members to vote in accordance with party instructions.

Those elected officials who are not compliant with party instructions can be demoted and/ or the party can expel elected members for a variety of reasons without giving the member a fair hearing before a neutral panel.

Political parties also will not to allow elected members to speak freely on issues before parliament or the legislature.

All of this is an infringement on an elected member’s ability to represent the people in the electoral district that elected that person to office and in many cases infringes on the elected member’s rights and freedoms under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The government did not pressure Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould in the SNC-Lavalin affair; a political appointee (Clerk of the Privy Council) and PMO employee (PM’s Principle Secretary) did -- and are culpable. They are not shielded from the Criminal Code.

The government did not demote Jody Wilson-Raybould -- the Liberal party did.

The government did not kick Jody Wilson-Raybould or Jane Philpot out of the liberal party.

If we want elected representatives to carry the voices of electors and residents in our parliament and legislatures, we have to curtail the enormous powers political partied wield over the people we elect. The best way to do that is to require them to comply with the Criminal Code provisions set out below.

Political parties disallow some potential candidates for fear they may be controversial, or may not follow party rules, and thus harm the party brand.

This is the madness of political correctness and censorship of dissenting opinion. If the party members in a constituency select a candidate who is controversial, they are making a statement that should bot be stifled, 
  

The concept that political parties’ own MPs and MLAs, elected under their banner, is abhorrent and unacceptable. Those elected representatives should speak for the people, not for the party.  


John Feldsted
Political Commentator, Consultant & Strategist
Winnipeg, Manitoba


    
******************************************
Corruption and Disobedience 

Bribery of judicial officers, etc.
119 (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years who:

(a) being the holder of a judicial office, or being a member of Parliament or of the legislature of a province, directly or indirectly, corruptly accepts, obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, for themselves or another person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be
done or omitted by them in their official capacity, or

(b) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives or offers to a person mentioned in paragraph (a), or to anyone for the benefit of that person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by that person in their official capacity.

Consent of Attorney General

(2) No proceedings against a person who holds a judicial office shall be instituted under this section without the consent in writing of the Attorney General of Canada.

Bribery of officers

120 Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years who:

(a) being a justice, police commissioner, peace officer, public officer or officer of a juvenile court, or being employed in the administration of criminal law, directly or indirectly, corruptly accepts, obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, for themselves or another person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment with intent
   (i) to interfere with the administration of justice,
   (ii) to procure or facilitate the commission of an offence, or
   (iii) to protect from detection or punishment a person who has committed or who intends to commit an offence; or

(b) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives or offers to a person mentioned in paragraph (a), or to anyone for the benefit of that person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment with intent that the person should do anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(i), (ii) or (iii).

121 (1) Every one commits an offence who:

(a) directly or indirectly
   (i) gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to an official or to any member of his family, or to any one for the benefit of an official, or
   (ii) being an official, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person for himself or another person, a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with
   (iii) the transaction of business with or any matter of business relating to the government, or
   (iv) a claim against Her Majesty or any benefit that Her Majesty is authorized or is entitled to bestow, whether or not, in fact, the official is able to cooperate, render assistance, exercise influence or do or omit to do what is proposed, as the case may be;

(b) having dealings of any kind with the government, directly or indirectly pays a commission or reward to or confers an advantage or benefit of any kind on an employee or official of the government with which the dealings take place, or to any member of the employee’s or official’s family, or to anyone for the benefit of the employee or official, with respect to those dealings, unless the person has the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government with which the dealings take place;

(c) being an official or employee of the government, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from a person who has dealings with the government a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person, unless they have the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government that employs them or of which they are an official;

(d) having or pretending to have influence with the government or with a minister of the government or an official, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept, for themselves or another person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with
   (i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or
   (ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office;
  
(e) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to a minister of the government or an official, or to anyone for the benefit of a minister or an official, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence, or an act or omission, by that minister or official, in connection with
   (i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or
   (ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office; or

(f) having made a tender to obtain a contract with the government,
   (i) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to another person who has made a tender, to a member of that person’s family or to another person for the benefit of that person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the withdrawal of the tender of that person, or
   (ii) directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from another person who has made a tender a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person as consideration for the withdrawal of their own tender.

Contractor subscribing to election fund

(2) Every one commits an offence who, in order to obtain or retain a contract with the government, or as a term of any such contract, whether express or implied, directly or indirectly subscribes or gives, or agrees to subscribe or give, to any person any valuable consideration
  
(a) for the purpose of promoting the election of a candidate or a class or party of candidates to Parliament or the legislature of a province; or
  
(b) with intent to influence or affect in any way the result of an election conducted for the purpose of electing persons to serve in Parliament or the legislature of a province.

Punishment

(3) Every one who commits an offence under this section is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Focus on the nine things I mentioned. That’s what will allow the Conservative Party to win the next election

IMAGE CREDIT:   Darryl Dyck, the Canadian Press. I thought I had already made up my mind who I would be ranking on my ballot, in the Conservative Party of BC leadership race; now I am not so sure.  That means that, at least for me, and perhaps many others, it’s a good thing voting hasn’t already taken place. There were initially only one or two of the candidates that I thought might be a little too right of centre for my liking, now it seems that list is growing. I consider myself more closely aligned with what used to be called a Progressive Conservative, regardless, I feel more than comfortable within the Conservative Party of BC.  Some, however, in messages to me on my political Facebook page, have been rather, shall we say, a bit mean-spirited in comments they’ve made about my ‘purity’ as a conservative. To tell you the truth, I really don’t care! Some leadership candidates, in comments made online, have also been raising the issue of who is a pure enough conservati...

WARD STAMER -- Those are REAL forestry numbers, not just made-up numbers

The following is a condensed version of remarks Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s made, regarding Forestry, in the BC Legislature, on Tuesday afternoon (02/24/2026)   Let’s talk a little bit, when we talk about Budget 2026, about the forest industry, which is near and dear to my heart. Forestry remains one of British Columbia’s foundational industries. It’s a pillar that built this province. Entire communities depend upon it. Interior towns, northern communities, Vancouver Island regions, the Kootenays, the Lower Mainland, with manufacturing facilities in Surrey and Maple Ridge, just to name a few — everywhere in BC is touched by forestry. One word that was not mentioned in Budget 2026 was forestry. That’s a shame, an incredible shame. It wasn’t an oversight – it was intentional. This government has driven forestry into the ground .... INTO THE GROUND! We can talk a little bit about some of the initiatives that this government has brought forth, to try to resurrect ...

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...

Labels

Show more