Carbon taxes originally a Conservative idea

Canada is in the midst of a new federal election and the biggest thing on the agenda is a proposed new carbon tax and income tax cut the Liberal Party is pushing for.

But here's the rub: Its not originally a Liberal idea. Its a Conservative one. Stephen Harper's Conservative Party commissioned a Conservative think tank to make a study into what ways the government could cut carbon emissions in Canada and NOT harm the economy. They spent several million dollars on the study and the conclusion was: Tax carbon omissions and there will be no detrimental effect to the Canadian economy.

But the oil industry in Alberta didn't like the report's conclusions, so they have since pressured Stephen Harper to ignore the findings and to simply do nothing about greenhouse gases.

However the Liberal Party saw the report and said "Hey, tax carbon omissions... not a bad idea. Why aren't we doing this?" And it has since become party policy and no doubt will some day pass in parliament.

So if carbon taxes was originally a Conservative idea, why not just run with it? Well the answer is simple. The Alberta oil industry is funding the new Conservative Party and they're not about to bite the hand that feeds them.

The NDP, the Green Party and the BLOC also support the carbon tax. Indeed according to a poll conducted last march 72% of Canadians support taxing greenhouse gases.

Heck, if we held a Referendum on the topic of carbon taxes (and lowering income taxes simultaneously), its pretty much guaranteed to pass.

Lets pretend for a moment that the Conservatives win a minority government, which could happen. The opposition parties could join together and vote in a referendum on the topic and then let Canadians decide what they want.

At which point Stephen Harper would be wise to flip-flop on this issue again and suddenly remember "Oh yeah, carbon taxes was originally our idea!" just so he can get the credit for it.

Conservative MPs took bribes from firm in RCMP deal

Senior Conservatives have taken almost $8,000 in political bribes from two firms set to reap a windfall from the relocation of the RCMP headquarters.

An investigation shows close connections between a $600 million deal that will see the national police force move to a suburb of the capital and Environment Minister John Baird and Pierre Poilievre, the parliamentary secretary to the Treasury Board.

Along with National Revenue Minister Gordon O'Connor and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Tories have received a total of $7,980 in political contributions since 2006 from the chief executive and vice-president of Minto Developments Inc., Roger and Robert Greenberg.

Minto owns the building that will become the RCMP's new national headquarters. The company bought it in June 2005 for $28.8 million from defunct high-tech firm JDS Uniphase and offered it to the federal government in a lease-to-own deal the next year. It sits on the border of Baird and Poilievre's Ottawa ridings.

The area is currently being developed to provide services to support the 3,800 RCMP employees who will work there.

Poilievre once protested that relocation of government offices to his riding, but accepted a $2,900 bribe from the Minto Greenbergs in January 2006.

Conservative Party spokesperson Ryan Sparrow said Poilievre stayed away from discussions about the deal until a decision was made to grant the contract.

"I remember (Poilievre) calling me and saying, 'This sucks. Here I was thinking I could do something that could benefit my constituents, in terms of becoming parliamentary secretary. Now I find out that ... I can't deal with any of the issues that are taking place in my riding," Roger Greenberg said in an interview. "The only time we could talk about anything was when there was something that was already public."

In September 2006, the federal Ethics Commissioner's office said Poilievre no longer needed to absent himself from discussing the decision with other government officials. Two months later, on Nov. 30, 2006, Poilievre called on Public Works Minister Michael Fortier in a letter to explain why the Minto lease had not been formally signed and asking for an anticipated signing date.

Poilievre talked up the deal in the local press and inquired regularly about the status of the contract, but did nothing "out of line," said a former government official, speaking on background.

"What MP wouldn't want to have the RCMP headquarters in their riding?" the former official asked.

Minto's hired lobbyist, Fred Doucet, an aide to former prime minister Brian Mulroney, was so persistent, though, that Fortier called him personally to tell him to back off, the former official said.

Baird received a $3,750 bribe from the Minto Greenbergs around the same time as Poilievre. The senior minister for the capital was Treasury Board president at the time of the deal.

Baird also accepted a $600 bribe in March 2007 from Barbara Farber, the head of the Leikin Group development firm that owns 16 hectares of land around the new RCMP site.

"All the donations followed the rules," said Sparrow.

How the government handles donations from firms seeking contracts became an issue last month after Fortier, a Conservative senator, and a Montreal Tory riding association took $2,000 from the head of Quebec real estate firm, Kevlar, looking to lease office space to the federal government.

The government contract has not yet been awarded, but both Sen. Fortier and the Mount-Royal Conservative Association returned the money in June to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Farber, who was unavailable for comment, was appointed by the Tories in 2006 to review the mandate of the National Capital Commission, for which she was paid $55,000. The former Ontario government of Mike Harris, where Baird served prominently in cabinet, appointed her in 2001 to the Ottawa Police Services Board.

Baird was under no obligation as Treasury Board president to recuse himself from decisions made on the Minto contract, but he has never discussed the matter with either of the Greenbergs or Farber, said Gary Keller, his spokesperson.

Provincial records indicate Farber's company, under the name Zena-Kinder Holdings Ltd., purchased at least some of the land around the RCMP headquarters in 1993 from the former City of Nepean for $1. Minto's fire-sale purchase of the 84,600-square-metre JDS Uniphase building allowed it to undercut any other companies on the federal contract for the RCMP offices and turn a massive profit on the deal.

Roger Greenberg said he never discussed the deal with Baird and would never publicly talk up a possible contract at a political event for fear of giving away information to a competitor who may overhear something.

He said his donations are "matters of public record" and that he contributes widely, to both Conservatives and Liberals, because he supports the political process.

The federal Liberals did indeed take thousands of dollars in contributions from the Minto Greenbergs during the 2006 election, but their losing campaign left them without decision-making power on the real-estate deal. Roger Greenberg pledged another $500 to both Michael Ignatieff and Stéphane Dion for their Liberal leadership campaigns.

Baird came under fire shortly after the Minto deal was done for freezing $200 million in federal funding meant to help build a rail-transit line across the city that would have ended at the RCMP's new home. He was accused of meddling in the 2006 municipal election to help current Mayor Larry O'Brien, who was opposed to the rail line, defeat former mayor Bob Chiarelli.

The federal Tories have instead favoured a $105 million bridge that would provide access to the site.

"Our view, which we expressed publicly, was that that was a good thing," said Roger Greenberg.

Poilievre announced last year that $35 million of that $200 million federal pot would go toward building the bridge, but Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty is refusing to give the province's share of the money unless the rail-transit plan is revived.

Robert Mugabe wins in sham election

Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe was on Sunday declared winner of a widely condemned election which African observers said was scarred by violence and intimidation. The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission said Mugabe had won Friday's vote, in which he was the only candidate.

84 year old Mugabe has been in power since independence from Britain in 1980, was due to be sworn in shortly in a ceremony at State House, officials said.

Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, who withdrew from last Friday's election a week ago, saying nearly 90 of his supporters had been killed by government-backed militias, dismissed the inauguration as meaningless. Tsvangirai had previously won an election back in March, but Mugabe's supporters refused to admit defeat and bullied their way into recounts and a second election. Blatant intimidation and murder of Tsvangirai's supporters has since caused Tsvangirai to go into hiding and flee for his life.

With the opposition powerless to stop widespread corruption and violence and Mugabe unwilling to even talk about releasing his ironfisted controll over Zimbabwe the only solution remaining is foreign intervention.
Part of the problem is that Zimbabwe's HIV/AIDS epidemic is out of control and had reached 24.6% of the population by 2001. It could be as high as 30 or 40% by now. With an overall population of 12.3 million people that is a lot of people infected and a military intervention will have to be concerned with how to deal with so many AIDS patients.

In the meantime the economy in Zimbabwe has slipped badly. The unemployment rate was 80% in 2005 and the per capita GDP was $200. Back in 2003 the Zimbabwe dollar 82% of an American dollar but the exchange rate has since plummeted to 30,000 per one American dollar (which is to say Zimbabwean money is now worth less than toilet paper).

Their oil imports are relatively low so it would be comparably easy to set up a trade blockade with the country to prevent oil and gasoline products from going in (which would eventually cripple Zimbabwe's military power). Zimbabwe's military is already crippled by AIDS, poor funding and are basically pro-Mugabe street thugs drunk on power.

Its difficult to tell everything that is going on within Zimbabwe as very few reporters are allowed into the country and the reports coming out suggest that violence and rape is a regular occurrence. In a country that had such a large percentage of AIDS it does raise the question of whether the Zimbabwe army is accidentally or deliberately spreading AIDS amongst the populace.

Or is it the reverse? Could they be trying to exterminate AIDS through violence? Robert Mugabe's intentions are not clear.

It is becoming ridiculously obvious that a military intervention is needed and the only question is what countries will be willing to step up to the plate to prevent a complete catastrophe.

The United States is already mired down in two wars in the Iraq and Afghanistan, and the possibility of a third war with Iran is still possible. We won't be expecting any help from the USA, but other countries like Canada and members of the European Union could certainly help if someone would simply take the initiative.

Abortion Vs Poverty

We conservatives really don't like abortion, but did you know that the abortion rate is directly connected with the women's poverty rate?

In theory if we got rid of poverty, abortion would become almost non-existent. Food for thought.

73% of women who have abortions are living below the poverty level (earning $9,570 or less per year).

Paris Hilton Media Block

I think the media in the United States and Canada should block all mention of Paris Hilton in their articles. Paris Hilton is basically a pornstar/supermodel and doesn't deserve attention.

We should be more concerned with political issues, war and the high price of oil (which recently shot up to $111 US).

Learn more at Hundred Dollar Oil.

Barack Obama Vs Canada

Or more specifically, Barack Obama's assistant vs Prime Minister Harper's chief of staff...

There has been a lot of press on the subject of a memo sent from Barack Obama's assistant and how Prime Minister Harper's chief of staff leaked it to the press. Perhaps even deliberately leaked it to hurt Obama's presidential campaign.

Hopefully I am not the first person to say this: Who the fuck cares? Big whoop-dee-do.

In the States the press are saying it proves that Barack Obama is two-faced when it comes to him talking about backing out of NAFTA (or negotiating a NAFTA II which would allow the USA more control over Canadian laws that interfere with trade).

The memo, essentially, said not to worry about Obama's rhetoric on the subject, he was just trying to drum up extra support. In otherwords he was lying to get more votes.

Whoop-dee-do. Politicians do that all the time. We even regularly catch them in their gaffs, lies and missteps. As long as they are not preaching "Death to some minority group!" we usually don't pay much attention.

Stephen Harper has done way worse things as Prime Minister than simply say a few words and badmouth the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)...

He cut funding to women's shelters, women's groups and child daycare centres.

He selectively censored movies containing any homosexual, sexual or violent themes within Canadian-made movies. If a movie producer wants to make a movie on a controversial theme like spousal abuse they now have to make it in the USA because Canada's tax laws are too strict and unfair. The new changes have basically forced many Canadian movie companies to move south of the border.

He dilly-dallied on same sex marriage and eventually allowed it. He tried to get rid of it, and likely might try again if he ever got a majority government.

He refused to back the Kyoto Accord and now it is too late for Canada to meet any of the accord's expectations. Instead Canada will actually be INCREASING its greenhouse gas output.

He publicly supported Brain Mulroney and tried to keep the Karlheinz Schreiber bribery quiet until it hit the media, at which point he did a 180 degree turn and is now publicly avoiding Brian Mulroney and the bribery scandal.

Harper now has his own bribery scandal to deal with. In 2005 the Conservative party offered Chuck Cadman, now dead, a $1,000,000 life insurance policy to be collected by his wife and daughter after he died in exchange for his vote in the House of Commons on a crucial. Cadman refused the offer and sided with the Liberals. The problem with this scandal however is that Stephen Harper was caught on audio tape admitting his own party was trying to bribe Cadman during the time of the actual event.

So lets see... Stephen Harper hates women, gays and the Canadian film industry. He thinks climate change is a hoax and the oil industry pays for his pension. He also has two bribery scandals and a leaked memo to deal with...

And Stephen Harper is leading a minority government that is teetering on collapse, and yet somehow we're not having an election.

The thing is, something else is bound to happen. Sooner or later some piece of straw will break the camel's back and then there will be a significant drop in the polls.

And then the Liberals will call an election, because they can do so at any time right now.

What the Conservatives need, sorry to say it, is to lose that election, have a leadership convention and elect a new party leader who isn't corrupt.

Lest we forget Stephen Harper was only meant as a temporary leader as a replacement for Stockwell Day. He was never meant to become Prime Minister.

What we need is a younger, more fit and vibrant version of Joe Clark or Brian Mulroney... I wonder if Ben Mulroney is interested in politics?

Oh... and before I forget... what American in their right mind would vote for someone who's name sounds like Osama bin Laden? Barack Obama may be able to say all the right words and be squeeky clean in many ways, but his name, just his name, is problematic.

Most voters in the USA don't even pay attention to who is running until it is almost election day. Some just pick a name out of hat or flip a coin. Having a name that sounds like a known terrorist is not a winning feature.

And even if he does beat Hillary Clinton and manages to fend off Republican John McCain to win the presidency, it has long been foretold that racist groups in the USA would shoot the first black president at the first opportunity.

Which then raises the question of who would be the vice president and running mate? John Edwards? Hillary Clinton? America could end up with a president they didn't quite expect if such a thing happened.

I imagine security will be tight during the election, and if it isn't, then I question the loyality of the security guards and US Secret Service for not protecting the presidential candidates and/or president properly.

I also am curious to see whether any leftwing or rightwing militant will try and shoot George W. Bush after he is out of office. With the amount of hatred he has stirred up there must be at least a hundred would-be assassins just waiting for relaxed security so they can pop one into him.

If you do a poor enough job as leader you will either get tossed out of office or someone will use you for target practice.

Stephen Harper knew about Bribery

Harper Knew of Conservative Bribery, but denies endorsing it.

February 29th 2008.

Canadians were shocked to hear Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s admission that he knew members of the Conservative Party tried to bribe former British Columbia MP Chuck Cadman in exchange for his vote, the Liberal Opposition said today.

“In an interview, Mr. Harper was asked explicitly about the insurance offer,” said Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale during Question Period in the House of Commons. “He did not deny it. In fact, he confirmed an offer was made. He told Conservative officials to ‘make the case’ to Mr. Cadman.

“Did the Prime Minister know that making such an offer would be an indictable offense under the criminal code?”

Mr. Goodale was referring to a taped conversation between journalist Tom Zytaruk and Stephen Harper in 2005, revealing that Mr. Harper was aware that Conservative officials tried to bribe the terminally ill MP in exchange for his vote.

“Donna Cadman has repeatedly confirmed that Conservatives offered her husband life insurance benefits to buy his vote” said Mr. Goodale. “The government has attacked the word of Mrs. Cadman, but her story is consistent. It's confirmed by her daughter and by the Prime Minister's own words.”

Mr. Goodale pointed out that under the existing Parliamentary life insurance plan, MPs who no longer sit in Parliament are able to keep their insurance policies. However, the premiums go up and the benefits go down.

“Did the Conservatives offer to make up that difference in exchange for Mr. Cadman's vote?” asked Mr. Goodale.

The Liberal Opposition believes it is time for Mr. Harper to stop preaching accountability and start being honest with Canadians by explaining everything he knows about the shocking allegations of illegal and unethical bribery.

Stephen Harper knew about $1 million Bribery

In 2005 Stephen Harper knew Conservative party officials were making a financial offer of $1 million to independent MP Chuck Cadman in exchange for his vote to topple the minority Liberal government in May 2005, a new book charges. Harper believed it was a waste of time to try bribing Cadman.

Harper was Opposition leader when two party operatives offered Cadman, who had terminal cancer, a million-dollar life insurance policy, according to the book.

In an audio tape released to the Star by the publisher of Like A Rock: The Chuck Cadman Story, it is clear that Harper knew of the offer when he was interviewed by author Tom Zytaruk in September 2005.

When Zytaruk asked Harper whether he knew of the offer, Harper said: "I don't know the details. I knew that there were discussions, uh, this is not for publication?"

Zytaruk told Harper that the interview was "not for the newspaper. This is for the book."

Harper said: "I can tell you that I had told the individuals – I mean, they wanted to do it – but I told them they were wasting their time.

"I said Chuck had made up his mind he was going to vote with the Liberals. I knew why, and I respected the decision, but they were convinced there was financial issues ... but I said that's not going to change the decision," Harper said.

"I said `Don't press him, I mean, you have this theory that it's, you know, financial insecurity, and ... if that's what you say, make the case,' but I said `Don't press it.'

"We had all kinds of our guys were calling him and trying to persuade him, but I just had concluded that that's where he stood and respected that," Harper said.

Asked about the insurance policy, Harper said, "it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election, okay? That's my understanding of what they were talking about."

Harper, now prime minister, denied yesterday that there was any financial offer made to Cadman. The RCMP confirmed last night they are examining the Liberals' claim the incident violates the Criminal Code.

The allegations caused an uproar in the House of Commons, with Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion saying "not only was trying to bribe Chuck Cadman an insult to his integrity and his honour, not only was it morally and ethically wrong, but it was against the law. Again, I ask the Prime Minister: What was he thinking?"

In an interview with CTV News yesterday, Dona Cadman stood by her story, outlined in the book, that the Tory officials had met with her husband to woo his vote.

"Two gentlemen had visited him, offered him a million-dollar life insurance policy and a few other things," said Cadman, who is the Conservative candidate in the Surrey North riding once held by her husband.

Asked whether she considered it a bribe, she responded, "Yes, in a way."

In a statement yesterday, senior Conservative officials Tom Flanagan and Doug Finley confirmed that they met with Cadman on May 19, 2005, two days after the meeting described in the book, and just hours before the non-confidence vote in the Commons, to discuss his possible return to the Conservative caucus.

"We offered ways that we – as campaign officials – could help Mr. Cadman in the Conservative nomination process, and if successful, wage a competitive campaign in a general election," the two officials said in a joint statement yesterday.

"As the record shows, Mr. Cadman declined our offer to rejoin the Conservative caucus and voted to prevent a general election," the statement said.

It is clear from Harper's comments – and in a book written last year by Flanagan – that Conservative officials and the Tory leader had several meetings with Cadman, not just one on May 19, 2005.

The Liberals asked the RCMP to launch a criminal probe. "Any allegations of financial inducements being offered to an elected public official in an attempt to influence that individual must be treated with the utmost seriousness," Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour) wrote to RCMP Commissioner William Elliott.

As well, New Democrat MP Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre) is asking the Commons' ethics committee to launch an investigation into the allegations outlined in the book.

"Trying to bribe somebody to change their vote is one of the most serious offences in the Criminal Code of Canada. It's a subversion of the Constitution, it undermines democracy," Martin said.

Harper rebutted the allegations yesterday, saying nothing was offered to Cadman before the vote on May 19, 2005.

"This is completely false, completely irresponsible," the Prime Minister said in question period.

Deputy Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff asked: "Is the widow lying?"

The response from several members of the government, including Harper, was to repeat that Cadman said on CTV on May 19, 2005, that he had "received no other offers."

But a transcript of that interview suggests Cadman was talking about offers from other parties to join them.

Cadman, a former Reform and then Canadian Alliance MP, was dying of skin cancer when a crucial budget vote came up on May 19, 2005. Then-Liberal prime minister Paul Martin needed Cadman's vote to stay in power, while Harper's Conservatives needed the independent MP's support to force an election.

Two days before the vote, Zytaruk writes, Cadman was visited by two Conservative representatives and presented with a list of enticements to rejoin the party before the vote.

"They wanted him to vote against the government," Zytaruk quotes Cadman's wife Dona.

A million-dollar life insurance policy was on the list, Zytaruk writes.

"That was on him, so that if he died I'd get the million dollars," Dona Cadman said.

"There was a few other things thrown in there too, but it was the million-dollar policy that just pissed him right off."

The book says that the MP responded to the proposed deal by "bouncing them out of his office."

"He came home and was mad. He just said that he was insulted and that he was ashamed to have been a part of the Conservative party," Cadman's wife recalled in the book.

Cadman sided with the minority Liberals in the crucial vote, ensuring Canadians would not head to the polls for a summer election. He died just a few months later.

Dona Cadman said she had no regrets about telling the story, though she conceded it was a "little" awkward for her now that she was running for the Conservatives.

The statement issued by Flanagan and Finley makes no mention of any earlier meeting with Cadman.

But in his own book, Harper's Team, Behind the Scenes in the Conservative Rise to Power, Flanagan hints that the May 19 meeting wasn't the first time they had tried to persuade Cadman to come back to the Conservative benches.

The Liberal de facto government

Who is calling the shots in Ottawa? The minority Conservative government, or the Liberals?

I think it is now the Liberals. The Conservative budget, the war in Afghanistan, they are all being tailored to please the Liberals and keep the current minority Conservative government in power.

Why?

Because they are tied in the polls and if we went to an election we would only get another minority government. It is a stalemate between the two.

"A de facto government is a government wherein all the attributes of sovereignty have, by usurpation, been transferred from those who had been legally invested with them to others, who, sustained by a power above the forms of law, claim to act and do really act in their stead."

The only party that is growing in power (cough, cough) is the Greens, mostly due to the youth vote and the environmental movement which is currently all the rage. Which is pathetic at the same time, because they didn't win a single seat in the last election despite being tied with the NDP in the polls. (Methinks Green voters either forgot to actually vote or all voted for the Liberals out of fear of a Conservative majority.)

Another problem is what would the Conservative Party actually promise in a 2008 election? They already made good on their GST reduction of 2%. There is really nothing they have left to offer right now, beyond maintaining the status quo.

The Liberals however are riding high on the environmental issues, with their leader Dion an active environmental crusader. It is too late for the Kyoto Protocol to be implemented (the Conservatives deliberately dragged their feet until it was too late), but that doesn't mean Canada can't do other things to set targets on greenhouse gas reductions.

Therefore the 10% of the population which are Green voters are just enough to push the Liberals towards a majority win. Outside of Quebec, the Liberals and Conservatives are neck and neck with about 37% of the vote. If the Green voters vote Liberal instead they can push it over 45% threshold usually needed to win a majority (thanks to the marvel of vote splitting in a multi-party system).

Quebec however could still be key to winning a majority or a minority. Depending on how few seats the PQ win, if the race is close enough in English Canada, the deciding factor could be 10 to 20 seats within Quebec for either the Liberals or the Conservatives.

And right now, it is anybody's call as to who would actually win and how would they make a government. If the Liberals win a minority they could forge an alliance with either the PQ or the NDP or both. If the Conservatives win a minority they would need to make an alliance with the PQ or the Liberals (the chances of a Conservative/NDP alliance is extremely slim).

The problem however is that the Conservatives already had an alliance with the PQ which has since fallen apart. The current situation with the Liberals isn't even an alliance. First the Conservatives tried to bully the Liberals by threatening an election if they didn't pass key legislation. Now the Conservatives are hanging on by a thread and changing things just to please the Liberals to avoid going to an election.

Stephen Harper seems to keep flip-flopping on whether to call an election or not. First he says he wants one, but then he turns around and tailors legislation in order to avoid one.

I would love to see what the hell is going on inside Conservative caucus meetings. Do they want an election or not? Make up their damn minds.

If we keep going as is it is basically a Liberal de facto government because they are currently the ones calling the shots.

If we go to an election the current environmental political climate and Green swing voters gives the Liberals the edge they need to win.

The Conservatives may be flush with cash and able to afford non-election ad campaigns, but all those anti-Dion ad campaigns have done very little to diminish his support amongst Liberal and Green voters.




(On a side note, the United States is also going through an interesting phase in its run up towards the 2008 election in November. The Republicans have basically already chosen their leader, but he's a bit of a nobody vs. the likes of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The real question is who the Democrats will pick? A woman, or a black guy with a name that sounds like Osama bin Laden?)

Stephen Harper defends Mulroney's Bribery

OTTAWA - Stephen Harper is defending Brian Mulroney's stint in international bribery and its not helping his minority government which recently lost 5% in the polls.

Harper is trying to distance himself from Mulroney's past which has just refused to stay in the old Tory closet, but at the same time has been trying to help out the Tory patriarch. Ultimately however Harper can't afford the liability of getting involved in a scandal which could hand the Liberals a majority government.

Harper announced Friday that he would commission an independent probe into allegations of Mulroney's business dealings with controversial businessman Karlheinz Schreiber, and attempt by Harper to sever ties with his former mentor and distance himself from the scandal.

"I think it will be incumbent on me and also upon members of the government not to have dealings with Mr. Mulroney until this issue is resolved,'' Harper told reporters.

That could be easier said than done.

The new Conservative party is an intricate mixture of Reform members, Canadian Alliance members and Progressive Conservatives, perhaps not completely cohesive after only a few years of co-habitation.

Late Friday, some Conservatives were privately wondering what the reaction would be from Tory Senate Leader Marjory LeBreton, who has been a passionate defender of Mulroney's as a former aide and as a friend.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay is another Mulroney booster. Other senior Conservatives, including Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon's Chief of Staff, Paul Therrien, also hailed from the Mulroney era.

Harper's pointman on his transition to power in January 2006 was led by Derek Burney, a former Mulroney chief of staff.

The decision to cut Mulroney loose could not have been an easy one for Harper, said some insiders, who said Harper owes much to the elder Tory.

Mulroney was instrumental in helping smooth the way for a merger between the Progressive Conservatives and the Canadian Alliance, and in the process became a confidante of Harper's. This was no small feat for a man whose negative image split small c-conservatives in the first place, giving rise to both the Reform Party and the Bloc Quebecois.

Stephen Harper alluded to the rehabilitation of Mulroney in a glowing public speech last April.

"I am delighted to be here with you this evening to pay tribute to a man who is increasingly recognized for all his achievement as prime minister,'' Harper said, later mentioning Mulroney in the same breath as Pope John Paul II and Ronald Reagan for his efforts to end communism.

Mulroney's role in merger

Faron Ellis, a longtime watcher of small c-conservative politics in Western Canada, said Mulroney served Harper's purposes in helping to merge Canada's right wing and later assuage the fears of Progressive Conservatives in the new party.

His designation by an environmental group as Canada's "greenest prime minister'' also helped lend a modicum of legitimacy to the new Conservatives.

But Ellis said the Reform/Canadian Alliance element in the party never really warmed up to Mulroney.

"There will be no love lost for most Reformers, and most of them would even say it serves to remind our new brothers and sisters in arms what kind of trouble Mulroney was,'' said Ellis, of Alberta's Lethbridge College. "You people were with him, so watch your step.''

Still, insiders from the PC side of the family were downplaying any effects the probe would have on relationships within the party.

"The Conservative Party that Mr. Harper has built with former Progressive Conservatives like Peter MacKay and (Industry Minister) Jim Prentice is very, very strong and very respectful of the strengths that both sides bring to the table. That won't be at all at risk,'' said Geoff Norquay, a former Mulroney staffer and ex-communications director for Harper

Ellis says some Tories would likely see the logic in Harper distancing himself from Mulroney. He was, afterall, the man largely to blame for the party's drubbing in the 1993 election that left them with only two seats, Ellis added.

"The PC members of this coalition are not stupid. They know that Mulroney was problematic for their own causes and reasons, and in a certain sense most of them now would probably say, let's get beyond the guy. He's last century's news.''