What do you do with a drunken premier - Page 2

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 02:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
The charge has absolutely nothing to do with his ability to lead the province.

Drama queens go home.

He broke the law, Asher. While in office, and in a foreign country. I usually downplay this sort of personal indiscretion (no matter what party they're from), but the criminal nature of his action actually makes me favour his resignation.

EDIT: sp

Asher · January 13, 2003, 02:04

Even MADD doesn't think he should resign anymore.

The only people who think he should are people who disagree with him politically.

Gee....

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 02:07

Asher, did you see me calling for Ralphie's resignation?

And The www.madd.ca site still has them requesting his resignation until "the issue is resolved". Which has been their position since the beginning.

Asher · January 13, 2003, 02:08

Quote:

Asher, did you see me calling for Ralphie's resignation?

Why would you call for his resignation? He didn't do anything wrong at all. There's no excuse.

Quote:

And The www.madd.ca site still has them requesting his resignation until "the issue is resolved". Which has been their position since the beginning.

Give the webmaster time to update it, I just saw it on the news 5 mins ago.

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 02:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher

Why would you call for his resignation? He didn't do anything wrong at all. There's no excuse.

Give the webmaster time to update it, I just saw it on the news 5 mins ago.

When government officials break the law in such a serious manner then they should resign. Period. My point is that I don't call for the resignation of public figures when they act stupid; I do when they commit criminal acts.

He is supposed to write the law and then breaks it? Come on. He should find another line of work.

Asher · January 13, 2003, 02:13

Everyone breaks the law in some way or another, it's stupid to assume everyone won't.

He didn't contest the charge, he appeared to show true remorse afterwards. That's why MADD retracted their all for his resignation, they thought he showed true remorse...

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 02:19

Aswher, I've never been arrested, never been in jail. Is it really wrong that we ask such a simple thing of our government officials while they hold office?

And if I was being political, I'd be asking the Libs to keep him. Best way of eroding their support.

Asher · January 13, 2003, 02:21

Politicians are crooks by default.

If he resigned someone who voters DIDN'T vote for would take office, all because he made a stupid mistake that he expressed remorse for in a different country.

He's fine in office, we shouldn't waste taxpayers time and money changing up leadership.

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 02:24

Voters vote for their representative in the leg. ass.

They know that the head of the party will not necessarily remain so. It happens all the time in Canada. And a leadership race won't cost the taxpayers money; it will cost the BC Liberal party money.

Asher · January 13, 2003, 02:29

I think Chretien should resign for all of his scandals, his scandals actually hurt Canadians...

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 02:33

a) he is resigning

b) he hasn't been convicted of breaking the law (which Mr. Campbell undoubtedly will be)

c) Mr. Campbell seemed to be fond of calling for the resignation of NDP politicians when he was in the opposition, and they weren't even going to be convicted...

Asher · January 13, 2003, 02:35

Does anyone else think that if a premier is elected on a campaign promise, he should be convicted of breaking the law when he breaks it?

Quote:

Mr. Campbell seemed to be fond of calling for the resignation of NDP politicians when he was in the opposition, and they weren't even going to be convicted...

Of course. What other purpose does the opposition have?

It's expected.

Jaguar · January 13, 2003, 02:42

I thought this thread would allude to Dr. Strangelove somehow. Maybe I was wrong.

KrazyHorse · January 13, 2003, 02:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
Does anyone else think that if a premier is elected on a campaign promise, he should be convicted of breaking the law when he breaks it?

No, because he can always plead that circumstances intervened. Which is what they do plead. If it can be proven that they defrauded the public with a policy they never intended to follow, then they should be tossed in jail.

Tingkai · January 13, 2003, 10:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
Everyone breaks the law in some way or another, it's stupid to assume everyone won't.

Is it really too much to ask our elected leaders not to commit crimes while in office?

I'd say it is completely reasonable to expect our leaders to uphold the law and not to break the law.

There's a big difference between not implementing a campaign promise and committing a crime like Campbell did.

You might be willing to have a criminal as your premier, by I am not.

Ozz · January 13, 2003, 10:35

Once he is CONVICTED, he should lose his seat, and a
by-election be held in his riding. The people of his riding
have the right to elect anyone they want to represent them, even this guy. They also have the right to not be represented by someone who's status has changed to criminal, during his term in office.

I'm sure his party has plenty of people waitng to step into his job.

As for the drunk driving, give him a taste of the "Cat" British Navy style circa 1870. He 'll remember not to
drink and drive after that.

Dr Strangelove · January 13, 2003, 10:40

Well Arizona had a governor convicted of Fraud IIRC.

Dr. A. Cula · January 13, 2003, 11:04

Make him chairman of the Senate, of course!

At least that's what the glorious leaders of the (reformed

) Communist Party did in Romania. One of the premiers from the 1992-1996 legislature was proven to be an alcoholic (evidence uncovered by the press, I don't remeber the details). Yet, after the 2000 elections, when his political party came back in power, the same man became chairman of the Senate. Go figure!

OneFootInTheGrave · January 13, 2003, 11:11

sack him

Asher · January 13, 2003, 11:21

Quote:

You might be willing to have a criminal as your premier, by I am not.

I'm willing to have a criminal as a premier provided they don't interfere with the duties I elected him for.

I don't give a rats ass what he does in his personal life, where he spends his time off, or what he's done in the past with his personal life as long as he's capable of leading the province/country/city/whatever.

Politicians with serious backgrounds like fraud, murder, etc. are ruled out, though. Politicians with speeding tickets, traffic infractions, and other traffic tickets don't bother me, including DUI charges.

But that's just me though, I don't see how DUI charges affect his ability to balance the damn budget.

Tingkai · January 13, 2003, 12:34

This isn't a minor speeding ticket. Campbell committed a criminal code crime. In other words, a serious crime.

The theory that this was something done in his personal life and shouldn't be used to judge his role as a lawmaker is flawed logic. According to this theory, a politician could commit murder and then claim that it was part of his personal life.

His actions also demonstrate an extreme lack of judgement. That creates the question of his ability to make proper decisions as a premier.

There simply is no division between private and personal decisions like this in politics. Every politician knows that this is the price they pay in return for power.

Laertes · January 13, 2003, 13:10

The Russians should have some useful advice on this question

DinoDoc · January 13, 2003, 13:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
Politicians with speeding tickets, traffic infractions, and other traffic tickets don't bother me, including DUI charges.

Is that all a DUI is in Canada? Thankfully we treat it a bit more seriously in the States (where the premier was arrested).

RedFred · January 13, 2003, 13:30

Particularly after listening to his apology, I think that he should resign. In advance of his news conference he promised to answer all questions. But he cut the questions short and danced around many others.

Key questions he danced around: Had he driven drunk before? Would he accept this behaviour from one of his cabinet or would he insist on their resignation?

I think we know the answer to both questions.

Drunk driving is not acceptable. This was not a marginally over 0.08 situation. He had three martinis and several glasses of wine. Commission of a criminal offence is not acceptable for any MLA.

As to the argument that this was a personal, private issue; not a gov't issue, I disagree. Campbell has called for (a) massive expansion of liquor distribution through privatisation of the Liquor Control Board (b) licencing changes to bars, pubs and restuarants to make it easier to serve alcohol (already implemented) (c) liquor sales on BC Ferries despite the fact that most people travel on the ferries with their cars. (d) reductions in funding in the Road Check program (implemented but somewhat backtracked on in light of overwhelming public opposition to the cuts).

RedFred · January 13, 2003, 13:32

DinoDoc, Asher is wrong. It is a serious criminal offense here as well.

Asher · January 13, 2003, 14:39

Quote:

Originally posted by RedFred
DinoDoc, Asher is wrong. It is a serious criminal offense here as well.

I never said it wasn't a serious criminal offense, I mean it's not one that affects his ability to lead the province.

I'm not wrong, it's an opinion.

I don't see why everyone always holds politicians up with some magnifying glass expecting them to be perfect.

Remember when it was a big deal when a politician smoked up when he was a teenager?

DUI doesn't relate to politics, and shouldn't relate to politics, and should not force a resignation.

If he was funneling taxpayer money to private accounts (*cough*Chretien*cough*) he should be booted out of office immediately. DUI in Hawaii relates to making government policies in Canada, how?

Asher · January 13, 2003, 14:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Tingkai
This isn't a minor speeding ticket. Campbell committed a criminal code crime. In other words, a serious crime.

The theory that this was something done in his personal life and shouldn't be used to judge his role as a lawmaker is flawed logic. According to this theory, a politician could commit murder and then claim that it was part of his personal life.

No, it wouldn't fly, because I've added specific clauses about that in my theory.

What he does on his own time, in another country, with a stupid mistake (rather than, say, premeditated murder) should not force him to resign on that account.

Quote:

His actions also demonstrate an extreme lack of judgement. That creates the question of his ability to make proper decisions as a premier.

ALL politicians have a lack of judgement, otherwise they'd stay the hell out of politics!

Quote:

There simply is no division between private and personal decisions like this in politics. Every politician knows that this is the price they pay in return for power.

If that was true, why didn't he resign?
How did Bush get elected president with a DUI conviction?

It's just an excuse for people who disagree with him politically to call for his resignation.

His goal as the Premier is to craft laws and run the province's government. It simply does not relate to his private life, and since all he's getting out of it is a $100-$500 fine I think it's absurd for him to resign...

Things that require premeditation are different. People make mistakes. That's what his incident was.

I wish people would wake up and realize the problem isn't with premiers getting DUI convictions in Hawaii, it's with a corrupt federal government and an unfair balance of power...

Smash · January 13, 2003, 14:45

It is absolutely related to politics.It shows extremely poor judgement.He was 5 minutes from his hotel.No taxis in Hawaii?..a short walk?

A BC Liberal is not liberal at all.His policies have been almost identical to Bush.I'm still can't figure out why the federal Liberals havn't sued them over the name.

He is gone.Within the week.Bye bye.

Asher · January 13, 2003, 14:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Smash
It is absolutely related to politics.It shows extremely poor judgement.He was 5 minutes from his hotel.No taxis in Hawaii?..a short walk?

He made a mistake. Deal with it.

He only had a couple glasses of wine, in retrospect it was a really stupid decision, yes, but it doesn't undermine his ability as a premier.

TELL ME, how exactly, it affects his ability as premier.
And no, it doesn't count to say it shows a lack of good judgement, because I've seen far worse judgement from Chretien and nobody cares about that.

Quote:

A BC Liberal is not liberal at all.His policies have been almost identical to Bush.I'm still can't figure out why the federal Liberals havn't sued them over the name.

Maybe because "Liberal" isn't a trademarked name?

And what the hell are you talking about, almost identical to Bush?

Look at the BC government's environmental positions, their stupid ministries of Women's equalities, their policies towards unions, etc. Hardly Bush-style.

mactbone · January 13, 2003, 14:55

I'm inclinced to say that his own party should determine whther he stays in office or not. If they can accept him, and he still has enough respect to accomplish his goals then I don't care. One thing I have to point out though is that he didn't try to sidestep it or use his office to get out of the charge. There was a Sergeant in South Bend that was arrested for drunk driving and he got out of it because "an untrained officer" gave him the breathalyzer. Bullshit. At least this guy is owning up.