Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Potential post for Toews raises ethical concerns

CAMPBELL CLARK

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 1:51 AM EDT 17/05/08

MP being vetted for judgeship, reports say ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. M Poland from Calgary, Canada writes: If Francis Fox can become a judge, anything is possible.
  2. Bert Russell Paradox, BC from Canada writes:
    Talk about GM being part of the Liberal Establishment. The horror show of Liberal Justices should be held accountable for dysfunction permissive pro criminal rule created under Trudeau, Chretien and Martin. Now these same Liberal MPs supported by CTV GM are critical of Conservative appointments. Globe
  3. Yogie Bear from The Forest, Canada writes: This government is 'very' tired after 2 and 1/2 years but I'm sure it is the Liberals fault somehow.
  4. Wendy Stone from Kitchener, Canada writes:
    What???? They are going to appoint a cabinet minster as a judge? And they can't even see that this a MAJOR conflict of interest????

    Enough, already.
  5. Just In from Canada writes: Wendy Stone from Kitchener, Canada ----- This latest story is part of the plan to eliminate any and all checks and balances or oversight. That is why independent judiciary is attacked as 'judicial activism'. That is why the upper chamber Senate is to be merged with the House of Commons to become only one entity. That was why CAIRS was eliminated. There will only be one Supreme Leader, 'In Emperor We Trust'.
  6. Bryan London Ontario from Canada writes: Just in, I am not sure if you are aware but wikipedia is not a news site or academic site. Anyone, including yourself can post a story or definition on Wikipedia.
    Also, you and Wendy Stone should educate yourself and maybe read the story first. For your little theory that the Cons are trying to eliminate all checks and balances please explain how the Cons will replace all provincial, federal and Supreme Court Judges in the next little while.
    Also please do a little research (outside of wikipedia) on judicial activism and judicial independance b/c your rants above make no sense and only show that you really do not understand what the two terms mean.
  7. Vern McPherson from writes:
    We NEED to get rid of these paranoid skitzatorys really soon before they comeletely screw up our country .........

    This is nonsense. They think Canada is their personal property........
  8. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Open! Transparent! Accountable! Yeah right. Not so you'd notice. Speaking of 'activist judges' what do we have here? OOPS.
  9. tom owen from Slovakia (Slovak Republic) writes: There are a number of issues raised by the possible appointment of Mr. Toews to the bench. The possible conflict of interest issue has been explored in the and it is clearly a problem. Can one really expect objective judgements from one appointed by a potentially biased process. There is also a larger issue. Historically judges have been chosen based upon their contribution and standing in the legal community. Mr Toews has spent most of his career in the political not the legal community. Before he ran for office he worked in the Manitoba Government. Now many politicians are lawyers but that does not mean that the political community is in fact an extension of the legal community. There is no question as a former Attorney General of Manitoba and Minister of Justice of Canada he has extensive political credentials but the cabinet and the court are two different worlds and that should be taken into account before appointing Mr Toews or any other politician to the bench.
  10. Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:
    Dion to Liberal caucus, 'Ok, the Cadman thing backfired and we're being sued for libel and it's not working, so let's do it again!'

    The caucus erupted in applause, Ignatieff's cries bringing tears to the back bench.

    I have a plan, says Dion.

    'Toews is illegal!', cried the former Liberal Environment Minister.
    'He is the devil!'

    Dion's plan, man.
  11. Dr. Winston O'Boogie from London, United Kingdom writes:
    Mike Sharp is already on record on these comment pages calling for Canada to abandon parliamentary democracy and adapt the U.S. model.

    I guess his rant on this article means that he supports the US-style judicial appointment (activist) system I.E. another call for Canada to be more like the U.S.?
  12. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: Hooray!! The obsessed Libby muck rakers, aided and abetted by a certain newspaper that need not be named, have found a new subject to take up the time of Question Period in their ongoing desperate, tiresome efforts to create scanadal where scandal doesn't exisit. Just in time to cover the inevitable loss of credibilty regarding the Cadman affair. Has anyone noticed how little information has been published re Cadman? Is any one surprised?
  13. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    Pat Martin, who is a notable rabble-rouser, agrees that Toews is qualified. He opines that the 'optics' aren't very nice. Fair enough.

    A big thing here is Toew's divorce thing. His ex submitted an expense claim of 13 grand A MONTH!! Who can pay that kind of support on an MP salary (even with the cabinet bonus).

    Thing about divorce settlements is that the paying party (usually the hubby) is not allowed to deliberately under-earn.

    I suspect the highest potential income for Vic would be as a big-shot judge.

    I bet he would be okay with being passed up---who needs the grief.

    Maybe that's why Pat Martin is soft-pedalling the outrage--let Vic get the rich job then fork it all over to the ex.
  14. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: In the unlikely even there will be any details given here regarding the RCMP descision re the contrived Cadman scandal, it is a pretty safe bet it will designated by G&M editors as a closed to comment issue. Don't hold your breath even waiting for it to be published at all.
  15. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: For what it is worth, the highly respected Justice John Gomery specialized in domestic law prior to his appointment and was divorced. So What?
  16. Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: Toews in Ottawa or out of Ottawa. I choose 'out of Ottawa.'
  17. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    '.....And there is speculation that his messy divorce from his wife of 32 years, Lorraine Fehr, now before the courts in Manitoba, might cause disaffection among conservative Christian voters in his Provencher riding.

    'Speculation?'

    'The federal Conservatives could raise questions of possible conflict of interest.'

    'Could raise?'

    ' Rumours that Mr. Toews...'

    'Rumours?'

    ' Could raise a potential conflict.' ' It can certainly leave the impression '

    Good God, what is this paper coming to? Last week it was Bernier's ex-girlfriend? This week Vic Toews divorce! What does his private life/divorce have anything to do with becoming a judge?

    The Globe and Mail Enquirer? There is NO point to this story-speculation-rumours-could-might......what is the point, except to sow seeds of doubt and TRY and MAKE news!
    .
  18. Pete H from Canada writes: R. Carriere from Maritimes: 'Facts, we don't need no stinkin facts.'
  19. Gardiner Westbound from Canada writes:
    All judges are appointed for their political philosophy and service to the party, which accounts for the goof ball decisions they render. Why should Toews be any different?
  20. David Bakody from Dartmouth, Canada writes: 'The North Wing' oh how the 'The West Wing' of White House has managed to make such in roads with a hand full of Canadian Republicans in only 2 1/2 years..........than again look at what a handful of Neo Cons have done in Iraq and Afghanistan.... Shameful indeed.
  21. Pete H from Canada writes: It takes very little to stir up the rabid 'hidden agenda' group, and the pros at the G&M do it very well. Please anyone, tell us what the purpose of including Toews divorce in this op ed has to do with anything? I'm with R Carriere, it has become painful to read this pap, and even more painful to see fellow Canadians sop it up.
  22. Well I'll Be A West Virginian Albino Mexican from Canada writes: One thing I can't figure is why the LPC drones posting here aren't millionaires already - as this hasn't even taken place yet (if indeed it will) and yet they all seem to know the outcome ahead of time.

    I mean, if you all possess such outstanding psychic abilities in that you make Kreskin look like an amateur, then why can't all of you predict the lotto numbers ahead of the draw and be set for life?
  23. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    And for all of you 'Holier than thou' Liberal partisans, you may wish to consider this:...and you worry about Towes! Perhaps the reason why the Canadian judicial system is upside down!

    In the Chretien years, more than 60 per cent of federal judicial appointments in Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan donated EXCLUSIVELY to the Liberal party in the three to five years before their appointments.

    Interviews with well-connected members of the legal community, including Liberals, a search of news data bases, and Elections Canada political contribution records, establish that a majority of the 93 lawyers who were appointed to the Federal Court, the Ontario Superior Court, and the Courts of Queen's Bench of Alberta and Saskatchewan had associations with the governing Liberals.

    More than 70 per cent of those appointed since 2000 to the Ontario Superior Court by Irwin Cotler and his predecessors, Anne McLellan and Martin Cauchon, donated money only to the Liberal Party of Canada. Forty of 56 lawyers gave ONLY to the Liberals..
    .
  24. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    ...The situation was similar in Alberta. Seven of the 13 lawyers (54 per cent) appointed to the federal bench in 2000 or later donated SOLELY to the Liberals. None of the lawyers appointed donated solely to the Conservatives...

    ...High-profile Liberals appointed to the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench included John J. Gill, co-chair of election readiness in Alberta for the Liberals in 2004- Vital Ouellette, who ran unsuccessfully for the provincial Liberals in Lac La Biche-St. Paul in 1997 and 2001- federal Liberal candidate Bryan Mahoney, who lost twice to Conservative Myron Thompson in the riding of Wild Rose- and Liberal fundraiser Marsha Colleen Erb, Calgary co-chair in 1999 of the exclusive Laurier Club, where membership is based on donations of $1,000 or more to the Liberal party. Erb was appointed by her friend, then-justice minister Anne McLellan...

    ...11 of the 17 judges appointed to the trial level of the Ottawa based Federal Court were found to have ties to the Liberals.

    Is it any wonder why the judicial system is upside down??
    .
  25. Compos Mentis from Toronto, Canada writes: R. Carriere says, 'The Globe and Mail Enquirer? There is NO point to this story-speculation-rumours-could-might......what is the point, except to sow seeds of doubt and TRY and MAKE news!' ......
    Clearly, any interest in true jounalism, from this rag, disappeared a long long time ago. Their agenda is clear and as the election draws ever closer I expect the g & m to stoop to even lower standards than they have already.
  26. kevin gauthier from Wasaga Beach, Canada writes: In 1991 our family and two others lost the majority of personal possessions when a 'North American' mover’s trailer caught fire and burned to the ground. The mover ultimately acknowledged a 'broken axle' as cause. This fire would not have occurred had the 'carrier' decided not to 'limp it in' from Ponten to Thompson. Obviously this decision was contrary to legislative requirements.

    My spouse and I exhausted a great amount of effort seeking accountability and appropriate compensation. Over several years our efforts included sending several requests to various government officials. I recall submitting more than one request to the Mb Minister of Justice (Vic Toews) at the time. To my recollection no charges were laid, the carrier not held to account, and no closure provided.

    So what have we learned from this experience that could be shared with the 'powers to be' of today? Accountability and transparency cannot exist without enforcement of the law.

    Kevin and Rochelle Gauthier
    Wasaga Beach, ON
  27. William Lundy from Ottawa, Canada writes: Excuse me. The Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeal is stacked with former Liberal Cabinet Ministers. What is the difference of appointing a retiring MP as a judge immediately before and election and appointing an MP as a judge without any election being called. Not much.
    This is yet another example of the Liberal elite believing all government appointments are their's by birth right.
  28. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    Compos Mentis,
    Pete H from Canada,

    Morning CM-Pete H: Seriously, I have no problems with a media scrutinizing the government of the day, regardless of Party stripe.

    It is actually their duty to question, investigate, and hold them accountable for their actions and non-actions. We should also expect the ruling government to be criticized much more than the opposition-yet the opposition in a minority situation must also be scrutinized because they do represent the majority of Canadians in both numbers and HOC seats!

    Where problems begin is when the 'supposed' Canada's national newspaper goes on an outright mission to discredit any and all aspects of the present government (easily trying to make news as this story clearly shows) while blessing the Opposition.

    Where has the factual and investigative journalism disappeared to?

    I cannot remember in several years where this paper took hold of an issue-presented the facts-presented the pros and cons of both the government and opposition parties-then perhaps came to conclusions!

    What we are left with today is 'Blasting' headlines-one sided opposition rants-anonymous sources, and blatant atttack tactics

    WHY?
    .
  29. Pretty Much Sane from Canada writes: Carrierer's quite correct in his dissemination of judges. One only has to look at who is there (an array of mostly nobody's) their financial support before their entitlement to appointments. See the latest SCC WRT CYJS and convince me in other words this is a rational decision. No sense naming names of these particular people because deep down it is obvious who the odd-balls are if you care to be honest with yourself. Check out the Senate as well - another excellent example of partisanship at its very best. Jeez, the obvious is er, obvious, so some of you readership should remove the dark glasses and commit to the truth. Some things never change eh?
  30. Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: It is getting very difficult to defend the Harper gov't. How do you defend patronage, firing of top bureaucrats, squaring off with Elections Canada and their rules, conflict of interests deeds, burgeoning travel expenses, 'financial considerations' being offered to circumvent the democratic process, the Manual of Dirty Tricks to side-line effective committee proceedings...?
    Well, one cannot vindicate the Harper gov't. The truth lies for all to see.
    One cannot ward off criticism. Harper and gang didn't plan on being around for this long and their misdeeds are catching up with them.
    So, what is left?
    Cast blame on others. Opposition, media, whomever.
    But, you can take the little piggies out of their pen, but they still look and smell like little piggies.
  31. Ontario Man from Canada writes: The liberals have stacked the judiciary with their liberal friends while the media kept silent, now that their death hold on the legal system is threatened the ethical issues about appointments are raised by the media.

    What a side show.

    This is just another example of how the few liberal elites exert their control, through fear mongering and slander.
  32. Gerry Pankhurst from westport ontario, Canada writes: Judging from what I am seeing lately and even on this page, there is a growing trend of vehement negative comment regarding the clearly biased editorial policies of the G&M. I give them credit for publishing them in this forum but I wonder if that is enough.

    Every once in a while the big boss writes a column that deals with the paper's image as he perceives it. I wonder what it would take to get him to make a straight out response to this current trend of wide spread criticism and whether or not it is of any concern.

    I don't keep track of circulation numbers but from what I read here and I hear from others, it would not surpise me to learn it's on a down hill slide. If that is so, I wonder how much longer the G&M can tout itself as being 'Canada's National Newspaper' and if there is any hope for them to clean up their act so it appeals to all except only to the lefties amongs its readers?
  33. Well I'll Be A West Virginian Albino Mexican from Canada writes: Ryan Ginger from Ottawa, Canada writes: Harper and his neo-con cronies are gorging themselves on the public trough yet again. Don't stop till the cupboards are bare.

    Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: R. Carriere: So, Harper's little piggies are different from the past?
    Again, though, just get Toews out of Ottawa.

    ===================================================

    No, Harper's 'little piggies' are no different from the past.

    But rest assured when the colour of the 'little piggies' changes from blue back to red you'll be defending the same actions you're attacking now and in typical Lib fashion somehow trying to justify it as necessary for the good of Canada.
  34. Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: 'Stephen Harper said in the 2006 election campaign that if he won a majority government, civil servants, appointed senators and judges who owe their jobs to the Liberals would limit his power.'
    Paranoia. But, will we recognize Canada when he is done?
  35. Compos Mentis from Toronto, Canada writes: Catherine Wilkie says, 'It is getting very difficult to defend the Harper gov't. How do you defend patronage, firing of top bureaucrats, squaring off with Elections Canada and their rules, conflict of interests deeds, burgeoning travel expenses, 'financial considerations' being offered to circumvent the democratic process, the Manual of Dirty Tricks to side-line effective committee proceedings'......
    Actually it's not too terribly difficult at all, if one is open to looking at the facts in each individual case instead of attempting to portray them as the same old sleezy liberal party that got tossed out the last election. The reality is that the Harper government is not perfect and there have been missteps along the way and to be sure they deserve some cristicsm. However, some in the media and the opposition are trying to equate these mistakes as proof positive that the corruption which existed previously, is as bad or worse under this regime, without having any real hard evidence to substantiate it. Instead of fact we get a story insinuating that something is dodgy and then it's all about the spin, with no hard facts! That is why we keep getting these tiresome accounts, such as this one about Mr. Toews, and not fact based reporting of substance that has real evidence of corruption or worse!
  36. gerhard beck from Canada writes: Open and transparent government, isn't that what Harper advertised? What a scam.
  37. Harper-approved lies are scripted talking points from Canada writes: Toews 'insists he intends to run again' but he would claim that whether he were lying as Tories usually do, or if this were one of the rare instances where they told the truth. If it is true, he can and should simply state that he will not accept any appointment. He won't need it after all, since he will be an MP again.

    But then I guess Tories are 'entitled to their entitlements' and their hypocrisy too.
  38. Joe Little from Calgary, Canada writes: CPC = Criminal Party of Canda or Corrupted Party of Canada whichever you look.
  39. Catherine Wilkie from Canada writes: Compos Mentis: Have you ever found the media 'biased' when they are dissing the other parties?
  40. 4Cryin Outloud from Canada writes: Hey if I was charged and taken to court for being an heterosexual, forever a one man gal, fundamental christian then Toews would be my choice as judge and jury.

    I don't agree with the gratuitous reporting of Toews' divorce but it seems that is what happens to those that have spent a lot of time trying to crush others that do not follow their hardline, fundamentalist, christian beliefs. Those crushed or sympathetic to those crushed are just waiting for a chance to humanize the holier-than-thou people like Vic Toews. Consequences? (shaking head) Agree or disagree.
  41. A M from Canada writes: Classic example of the true nature of the typical hard-line social conservative. Toews was a lead campaigner against stame sex marriage, arguing that gay couples would ruin the institution of marriage. Now look at him! He's ruining the image of marriage himself with what the globe calls a 'messy divorce.' Typical social conservative politician!
  42. Globe Loves Conservatives from Canada writes:
    ------------------------
    vern and wilkies new names------------
    George BrownIII from Christmas--A M from Canada--Harper-approved lies are scripted talking points---Joe Little from Calgary----Kan Tankerous from Tronna
    HEY WILKIE WHAT HAPPENED TO CLAUDE FRASIER? REMEMBER HIM NURSIE? THE ONE YOU ADMITTED ADMITTED ADMITTED ADMITTED
    TO DOUBLE POSTING?
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    ---------------------------
  43. True North from Canada writes: Since Harper's party has no ethics whatsoever, this shouldn't pose a problem for them.

    Harper's government cannot be trusted.
  44. mark watton from Canada writes: Harper promised to change the way judges would be appointed.

    I guess he's good to his word...
  45. BJ Homes from Ontario, Canada writes: One of the recent appointments by the Minister of Justice to the committee that suggests names of potential judges is Robert Martin, who has written a book entitled “The Most Dangerous Branch: How the Supreme Court of Canada Has Undermined Our Law and our Democracy.”

    A suspicious person might wonder if this appointment is part of a Conservative agenda to influence the selection of a certain type of judge.
  46. J Law from Canada writes: R. Carriere from Maritimes

    Once again I have found your comments much more informative than the 'Tall Tales' in this newspaper. And to think there are so many gullible people (see this comment board) who take this papers tall tales, rumours and innuendoes as truths without even a thought.

    Michael Sharp's cut ups of the people on this board and this newspaper are so funny because of their closeness to the truth. Is there no wonder?

    If the people on this comment board are going to read the stories then think about them for a minute. Is the story telling you anything or is it just spreading one-sided rumours? Some of you really remind me of the people who flock to Hillary's camp.
  47. Vern McPherson from writes:
    The COns will give themselves jobs while they exchange deck chairs ..........

    I wonder of towes asked for the job and stevie replies 'sure vic ' ................
  48. anonymous contributor from Canada writes: vic toews was an unmitigated disaster as a.g. in manitoba, being 'caught' time and again misinterpreting the various laws and judgements. he is a professional politician who could only hack out a living with 'friendly' support.
    interestingly toews is so dumb stockwell day has even noticed. stevie just wants this dimwit doing his 'judge roy bean' act out on the lone prairie.
  49. The Oracle from Canada writes: Harper's patronage appointment from the Reform days
  50. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: But, in California, a Republican-stacked Supreme Court still voted to uphold SSM. There, on PBS's News Hour, was a spokesman from some Family Values/RRW group complaining about activist judges. When the host reminded him that the Court was in fact a Republican-salted one, the gentleman complained that not all Republicans are sufficiently conservative. People like Vic Toews will never be happy until they can flip open the Big Book and employ their personal interpretation of a semi-relevant chapter and verse to mete out the justice they think that the Big Guy demands. The problem is, of course, that they often end up being beset by the same human problems they previously assumed to be the lot of lesser (immoral) mortals: divorce, unruly sexual appetites, gay offspring, etc. How then to judge?
  51. John Melnick from High River AB, Canada writes: What lawyer wouldn't want to get in on the judgeship gravy train. The stats for average (yes I know the limitations of 'averages') salaries for judges was top of the land according to a recent article from Stats Can and pegged at about $40,000 a year MORE than specialist physicians. Either they are soooo much smarter than everyone else interpreting all of our convulsed laws and / or the legal industry is alive and well - thanks to successive governments in the hands of, you guessed it, lawyers. So they are paid 30% more than those who intervene directly and save our lives.
  52. The Oracle from Caiman Islands, Canada writes: A taste of the piggyfest if Harper had a Majority
  53. Humphrey Pennyworth from Canada writes: It has become the norm lately for some to ask questions like ' What does a politician's private life have anything to do with that person's ability to do their job?'

    Well it seems to me that most people expect the people who are paid to represent them to govern their lives with a certain amount of decorum. They expect that these people will make sensible decisions with regard to how they conduct themselves, with whom they associate, etc. , all the time.

    Certainly a divorce is not a reason to deny someone a judgeship, since divorce has become quite common in today's society. However, there many other instances where one's personal life might make one unsuitable to be a judge, such as belonging to some cult, or associating with unsavory characters.

    Surely one cannot make the blanket statement that the personal life is of MPs, Cabinet Ministers, Judges and other public professionals is nobody's business.
  54. not surprised from somewhere, Canada writes: I just wish tehse con apologists would actually pay attention to what htey are writing and what their 'government' has said.

    I believe (although not a direct quote) the 'new' conservative government was to be different ffrom governments of the past. That it would hold the principles of transparency and acocuntability at the core of its practices.

    The defense that since the liberals did it we can too....this makes absolutely no sense what are we to understand here. That the 'new' government is 'clean' and accountable or that its okay cause the liberals did it. Im sorry but your arguments hold no ground in this case. I don't get it....spin spin spin.

    truely though, I'm not surprised at all. I hope with a democratic win south of the boarder, Harper will be isolated as a right wing leader. Can imagine an America thats more progressive than Canada....my goodness I hope it never comes to that.

    ABC
  55. Liberals steal from hardworking.... from Canada writes: Doesn't matter, Alberta will be a toxic wasteland within 10 years, let Toews have his cake.
  56. John Melnick from High River AB, Canada writes: Did anyone on this thread scrutinize the recent decision of SCC regarding the CYJA to see if the 5-4 split was linked at all to the political stripe of the party that appointed the judges? Interesting exercise. With respect to this split decision, those who feel that this was a huge victory for rights and freedoms should read the decision and note the narrow margin. Anything but clear cut.
  57. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: 'In 1991 he joined the legal Department of Great-West Life where he was responsible for the company’s Canadian insurance litigation. '

    Hey, this raises both my eyebrows. Power Financial who controls London Life, Great West Life, Prudential, Canada Life, etc. etc. and overseas the marketing of Manufacturers Life and Sunlife with the latter two companies just creating product, AS FAR AS MY UPTODATE INFORMATION IS CONCERNED, tells me that having been involved with the 150,000 London Life Policyholders who were made to lose terribly because of the arrangement for an agreement to be approved through the courts of the largest provinces, this is a big 'something sleazy'. Stephen Harper is well aware of this BIG ??????, as I had all the facts delivered to him personally. Preston Manning wanted to do something about this 'stink' but could not find a cabinet minister who had not taken contributions from the Insurance Industry. Now I know why Harper didn't even try! OMG !
  58. Derek Holtom from Swan River, Canada writes: outside of your own natural partisan leanings, why would anyone care if he became a judge or remained an MP?
  59. bob london from Canada writes: Qualified Judges? How un-liberal. Libbies put in teachers, and liberal fundraisers; Harper would consider a former justice minister? former Crown prosecutor? and attorney-general of Manitoba? Man what a tool.

    I would rather be in front of a f***ing teacher.
  60. Keith Conley from Calgary, Canada writes: Mr. Clark seems to think that it is okay for him to draw in the family of Mr. Toews, Mr. Clark now is the Reporter for the Globe Enquiry, like all the other papers which will go at any length to discredit anyone, except for those this reporter and the Globe support. I thought there could be some honour in the media, but I guess not. Anyone who comments on this, to me does not write about the subject at hand, but seems to be ready to slander the divorce between his wife and themn also taking in their beliefs. How many wives or husbands have the lIBERAL
  61. Mervin Hollingsworth from Saskatoon, Sk., Canada writes: Of course the Conservative haters will be out in full force on this. Even the opposition say Toews is qualified to be a judge but arguing the process. Give me a break. We would rather focus on process as opposed to whether the candidate is qualified or not.
    Being Conservative does not eliminate a person from being a judge. Only in the minds of the media and the opposition parties. We must at all costs keep the courts as liberal as possible so that we can continue to support the criminals rather than the victims of crime. That's the Liberal way. That's the way it must remain in Canada. Many Canadians disagree and feel real change needs to take place within the court system.
    Toews is a reputable man who has served his province and country well. If he is qualified to be a judge then appoint him and let the media and opposition parties get stuffed.
  62. The Oracle from Caiman Islands, Canada writes: Another move to consolidate Evangelical control. No joke Check it out.

    'Mr. Toews has close connections with two of the most conservative Christian groups in the United States: Focus on the Family[2] and Concerned Women for America' see: http://dawn.thot.net/harperstiestousa/Vic_Toews.htm (undersore between c and T)

    See: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=80f6fdff-cc0e-4a08-9b96-76f3db32808e

    It is still a free country. Check the sites and think about it.
  63. David Gibson from Canada writes: {{ I just wish tehse con apologists would actually pay attention to what htey are writing and what their 'government' has said.}} That sentence takes irony to new levels.
  64. Bob Beal from Edmonton, Canada writes: John Melnick: I gather you didn't do the 'interesting exercise.' I did.

    Of the five judges on the majority in that decision, three were first appointed to the superior courts by Conservative governments. Of the four on the miniority, three were first appointed to the superior courts by Liberal governments.
  65. Mervin Hollingsworth from Saskatoon, Sk., Canada writes: J Law from Canada writes: R. Carriere from Maritimes Once again I have found your comments much more informative than the 'Tall Tales' in this newspaper. And to think there are so many gullible people (see this comment board) who take this papers tall tales, rumours and innuendoes as truths without even a thought. Michael Sharp's cut ups of the people on this board and this newspaper are so funny because of their closeness to the truth. Is there no wonder? If the people on this comment board are going to read the stories then think about them for a minute. Is the story telling you anything or is it just spreading one-sided rumours? Some of you really remind me of the people who flock to Hillary's camp. --------------------------------------------- Of course if the opposition parties say something it must be and so that is enough to write a column about it and allows the opposition parties to make all kinds of accusations. If an unnamed source within the Conservative Party says something then it must be so and another reason to write a column. Why not wait for an announcement rather than speculate. I know we must expose these Conservatives for who they are.... Conservatives. After all it was perfectly alright for the Liberals to appoint their buddies to courts when they held power but don't let those nasty Conservatives do it because then that is showing favourtism blah, blah, blah.
  66. John Melnick from High River AB, Canada writes: Bob Beal from Edmonton, Canada - no I didn't do the exercise, thank you for the info. It is enlightening. Any comment on the disparity in average salaries for judges versus other professionals?
  67. Chuck Berry from Canada writes: Has a judgeship been offered to Mr. Toews? NO!!!! End of story!!!!!!
  68. Mervin Hollingsworth from Saskatoon, Sk., Canada writes: Wendy Stone from Kitchener, Canada writes:
    What???? They are going to appoint a cabinet minster as a judge? And they can't even see that this a MAJOR conflict of interest????

    Have you taken leave of your senses? Get real! How is this a conflict of interest. He is vetted and appointed (maybe) based on his qualifications. My God woman, the opposition even says he is qualified to be a judge.

    Get those Liberal partisan glasses adjusted.
  69. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    John Melnick from High River AB, Canada

    What is the annual salary of a Supreme Court Judge?
    Chief Justice: $334,100
    Puisne Judges:( other judge of the SC $309,300

    http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/faq/faq/index_e.asp
  70. Keith Conley from Calgary, Canada writes: Correction
    it is not all the other papers I should have noted in this,as this only has to do with the Globe', and I wish to apoligise to the other papers for saying so.
    This only has to do with this article at hand.
    Joyce Conley
  71. LLoyd Atkinson from Winnipeg, Canada writes: This is quite a fascinating story from many angles. I suspect a search of the Winnipeg Free Press files could find past Republican-style rants by Toews on 'activist' judges. I have a very vague memory of a past WFP weekly column by retired political reporter Frances Russell on a speech where Toews discussed abortion while appearing before a pro-life group. The column provoked letters to the editor from angry Toews supporters. But it is hard to argue that Toews as a former provincial attorney-general and federal justice minister, is not qualified to be a judge. After he lost his city-based MLA seat to the NDP, Toews went out into what the Free Press calls Manitoba's rural Bible Belt and found a safer federal seat.I suspect it would be still safe for him despite the divorce problem.But Friday's original Free Press story speculated Toews may have fallen out of favour with Stephen Harper and is not heard from much these days in the House of Commons compared to the past.
  72. R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: R. Carriere......well expressed.

    If the man is qualified (which he obviously appears to be) then what is the problem with him becoming a judge, unless the bashers would rather we move to the American system of elections!!!
  73. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Some posters appear not to have read the article very closely. Mr. Toews' pending divorce does not present a problem for his candidacy as a judge. His pending divorce is noted as presenting a possible problem for his re-election as an MP because his constituency is located in a so-called Bible Belt. The article suggests that he may not run again for this reason, thus being available to be appointed as a judge. Whether his constituency would spurn him is another matter, of course, but it is hard to see why when he garnered about two-thirds of the vote in 2006. It may simply be a matter that his failing to find favour (and thus influence) with Mr. Harper has caused him to evaluate his career options.

    Has it ever occurred to posters that judges' donations to political parties are strategic donations, not ones of conviction? If one wishes to climb in the ranks of one's profession and the means by which one might improve one's odds of doing so is by political connection, then one might simply make donations to the party one believes will be in a position to influence one's career.
  74. Daniel Cunningham from Victoria, writes: You ConBorgs don't seem to understand the concept of conflict of interest - but then that would be why your party will never attain majority status in this country (thank god). As for Michael Sharp - move already. Go hang out in Washington DC with your republican cronies - maybe you can trade prescription drugs with Limbaugh and knock over mailboxes belonging to democrats. You are a neanderthal - and a disgrace as a feeling human being.
  75. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: 'Vic attended Grades 1 through 8 at Princess Margaret School and Grades 9 through 12 at Mennonite Brethren Collegiate Institute. '

    Well, maybe Harper is looking at the education he received from the Mennonites, but with such a messy divorce going through the courts at present, it seeems as if he has 'backslided'; on the other hand $12000 plus a month seems an awful amount for any wife to use up without going overboard in this day and age. THESE FACTS ARE IMPORTANT WHEN CHOOSING A JUDGE! Character plays an important part in your decisions.
  76. james bell from Canada writes: r. m. from regina, you should read lloyd atkinson from winnipeg. i doubt it would even 'vibrate' your opinion, but he has it down precisely.
    vic is not known for his clever gibes nor for acuity of reasoning. stevie just wants him out of his sight.
    dumb, and narrow of vision, he always wins his riding by a landslide.
  77. Bob Beal from Edmonton, Canada writes: Hi John: I think the superior court judges deserve their salaries. They work hard in a difficult and extremely important profession.

    I don't think patronage ought to play any role in judicial appointments. I know it still does, though not as much as it used to. There have been cabinet ministers who have turned out to be excellent judges. But my feeling is that Toews would not likely be one of those.

    That said, I have never been able to see a political bias in Canada's superior courts. We don't have the same situation as in the U.S. where the court is often split on political lines. Here, those in the majority today may well be in the minority tomorrow. At least that is my impression. Even in the old days when patronage dominated judicial appointments, the supreme court applied the law with an even hand. The Supreme Court of Canada has an incredible record.
  78. B R from Canada writes: Michael Sharp from Victoria, Canada writes:
    Dion to Liberal caucus, 'Ok, the Cadman thing backfired and we're being sued for libel and it's not working, so let's do it again!'

    Wrong again, The RCMP decided not to lay any charges one of the reasons being that they could not interview the principal witness.

    The problem for the Conservatives is still there. Let us see what that law suit brings.
  79. Another Opinion from Toronto, Canada writes: For J Law: 'If the people on this comment board are going to read the stories then think about them for a minute.' That's funny, because I was thinking the exact same thing. R. Carriere is ranting on about something COMPLETELY unrelated to the article and all the conspicuous conservative partisans rally to his banner. You want to discuss facts? Fine. Let's discuss facts: Fact - When serving as Justice Minister, Toews restructured the judicial advisory board (supposedly an independant body) so that the majority of members were selected by the government. I remember when the issue came up and I suggested at the time it was a bad idea that removed even the pretence of objectivity from the process. Fact - Now that he's been responsible for picking many of these people, Toews is being submitted to them as a judicial candidate. Maybe he's a valid candidate. However, for a man who changed the rules in his party's favour to then subject himself to those rules certainly looks like a conflict to me. If it doesn't bother you, that's fine. Just don't insult your own intelligence by trumping up claims of conspiracy and bias. You don't seem to mind when they work in YOUR favour. You're just as bad as a Liberal partisan...
  80. Henry Wysmulek from Winnipeg, writes: And there has NEVER been a liberal appointed in clear conflict of interest????????????????????????

    Grow up already, you left wing looney tunes!
  81. John Melnick from High River AB, Canada writes: Bob Beal from Edmonton - In the absence of any hard data to the contrary I'll accept your premise that the SCC is not politically biased. But objective data is difficult to obtain since each decision is seen through the eyes of the person reading it and this is distorted by their own biases. On the subject of salaries I wholeheartedly disagree. An average 30% more than specialist physicians (as an example) is totally unacceptable and requires some justification other than 'difficult and extremely important profession'. Open heart surgery, cancer management, pediatrics are all 'difficult and extremely important professions' played out on a daily life or death stage. The only difference that I can see is that the federal and provincial governments are fraught with lawyers looking after their own.
  82. Bill Harrison from Canada writes: Over the years I can't recall the Liberals being overly concerned about the number of their crowd who have received judicial appointments, but, of course, we now have Conservatives making the appointments. A prime example of Liberal appointments is the Supreme Court who , in the decision on the youth-justice law's presumption issued this week showed that social engineering has been added to the role of the Supreme Court. This is something even the G&M found wrong!
  83. Bob Beal from Edmonton, Canada writes: Bill Harrison: You blame 'Liberal appointments' for the young offenders decision, which I gather you don't like. But, as I pointed out above, three of the five judges in that majority were first appointed to the superior courts by Conservative governments.
  84. NWT Knifer from Yellowknife, Canada writes: Harper is the Prime Minister of ths country. He can appoint anyone he wants to be a judge!

    I trust a former PC Member will do far better than the liberal hacks who crawled into judges robes. At least he can start the change that this nation needs

    iam sure if we had more Conservative Judges . Payer would still be in our schools. babies would not be murdered in their mothers wombs and People would be going to church and being with families instead of packing a mall on Sunday
  85. Bill Harrison from Canada writes: Bob Beal: Because a judge is appointed by a particular political party does not mean that judge will make decisions based on his/hers perceived social or political philosophy at the time of their appointment. One of the most liberal Supreme Court Justices in the U.S. of A. was appointed by George H.W. Bush, yet, until the time of his appointment he was considered a conservative. Please note that in my earlier comment I referred to Liberal appointments to the Supreme Court, not Liberals appointed!
  86. Greg Atkin from Canada writes: This is a guy Harper himself deemed incompetent as Justice Minister
    and now he's going to be a judge?
  87. so, what from USA, Canada writes: Well the right wing is still screaming...'THe Liberals did it, why can't we?' or 'The Liberals are thieves...liars...etc. etc.'.

    The point is right wing simpletons....THE REFORMATIVES PROMISED GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, AND OPEN GOVERNMENT'. Perhaps previous governments did screw up often and in many ways...please make sure you lump Mulroney in your pathetic rants.

    It's the current governments promise to the people to be elected. They said they'd be different...they promised they'd be accountable for their actions....Guess what....WHERE IS IT??? THAT is what this story is about. GROW UP.
  88. so, what from USA, Canada writes: NWT Knifer from Yellowknife, Canada writes: Harper is the Prime Minister of ths country. He can appoint anyone he wants to be a judge!

    I trust a former PC Member will do far better than the liberal hacks who crawled into judges robes. At least he can start the change that this nation needs

    iam sure if we had more Conservative Judges . Payer would still be in our schools. babies would not be murdered in their mothers wombs and People would be going to church and being with families instead of packing a mall on Sunday
    __________

    Perhaps spelling and grammar should have been in your school. How would you trust a person who was elected based on a lie? Good luck with that.
  89. Elmo Harris from Niagara, Canada writes: Here you are Carriere. I have rewritten the nasty bits just so there can be no doubt about the meaning.

    '.....And his messy divorce from his wife of 32 years, Lorraine Fehr, now before the courts in Manitoba, will cause disaffection among conservative Christian voters in his Provencher riding.

    Questions would be raised of possible conflict of interest and transparency if the Conservatives move to appoint cabinet minister Vic Toews as a judge in Manitoba, opposition MPs say.

    Some people have said that Mr. Toews might not seek re-election, but his office insists he intends to run again.

    Opposition MPs said that if he does seek a judgeship, Mr. Toews's role in recommending members of the judicial advisory committee that evaluates applicants for higher-court judgeships in Manitoba would raise a potential conflict.

    No more ambiguity. No more guessing. Just the facts. In case you haven't noticed lately, there is a party in Ottawa that will do whatever it takes to stifle anything they have not said or written themselves. Any deviation results in a lawsuit. These are dark days Carriere. Stalin would be proud of the work Harper has done in Ottawa in just two short years.
  90. Rt. Revd. Malachy Egan from Halifax, Canada writes: Oink, oink....
  91. Rick C from Canada writes: Until an application is actually unearthed this is all speculation.

    If Mr. Toews does submit an application he would be in conflict of interest with his current duties.