The recent revelations of government finagling over funding KAIROS shows us some of the great problems that are manifesting in the Conservative Party's execution of their legislative and policy dogma.
On the CBC website is a copy of the signed document with a "NOT" penned into a key sentence, with no date, initials or other information that would validate its existence and traceability.
The first question that I have to ask is why did a document in such a questionable state of authenticity was ever used to implement anything? If I write a cheque, and substantially change the amount of that cheque, I am obliged to initial each change I make. Surely no less a requirement should apply to the documents used to define and guide the implementation of government policy.
If, as Ms. Oda claims, the "NOT" was absent from the version of the document that she signed, then we must ask ourselves who added that word and when. Several issues arise in my mind. First, who had access to the signed documents after signatures had been acquired? Second, does the Minister's office not keep digital records of documents signed by the minister? ... and if not, why not? If there are such records, let's see them immediately.
Then we come to the next issue that deserves our attentions. The HarperCon$ ran on a platform of increasing government accountability and transparency. Does it not strike anyone else as odd that such a simple control as requiring copies of signed documents to be maintained (even electronically) at the various levels of authorization are not being executed? Further, how is it that nobody in either the government or the bureaucracy noticed this unusual alteration of a document? Or was this change done by one of the minister's political staff after the minister signed it purely for unofficial political reasons?
This business stinks - and, paraphrasing Shakespeare, Something is rotten in Ottawa.