Jump to content

Talk:Chuck Cadman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

As a confessed Conservative, it must have been painful for Cadman to vote with the Liberal Party and the New Democrats to support the current regime by standing for the proposed budget. But Cadman stuck to his principles as an independent sitting member of parliament, and voted the way he felt his constituents wanted him to vote. This act of supporting the current regime may be seen by some as a bit of payback for the conservative party abandoning him after 2 successful terms representing his riding. As an independent Cadman now has formidable power in the house of commons, a fact not lost on the conservatives or the liberals. (19 May 2005)

  • I don't think Cadman was that Maciavellian. He stated he had an independent polling company poll his constituents, and by an overwhelming margin they wanted him to support the budget. CBC news ran a poll of his constituents before the vote as well, and reported about two-thirds of the respondents wanted Cadman to support the budget. Corvus 19:17, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs some SERIOUS attention.

He was one of the few politicians I actually respected. (205.250.167.76 22:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Chuck Cadman is definitely no Jim Walding - Jim Walding accepted the financial compensation (in one form or another or one purpose or another) in exchange for his vote. We may or may not agree with all of Chuck Cadman's positions, but one can't hear the story of Cadman's refusal without feeling a deep respect for the man.

I am wondering if the political section for Chuck Cadman should be divided into four sections - the first to deal with an overview of his election history with nomination meetings and running for office, the second to do with "law and order" and the death of his son, the third to deal with his other issues and opinions as they relate to his job as an MP, and and the forth to deal with his last famous vote and these new allegations. While I am inclined to believe them, based on the past behaviour of both the Liberals and Conservatives and their cosiness with corporate lobby interests whose purpose it is to influence legislation, at this point, they are allegations so we got to quote the various opinions and, if more than one interpretation of a statement is available, include both interpretations.

Belinda Stronach dumping her party and boyfriend the same day could be used to set up the context for the discussion of the vote and to point out that it was Chuck's vote, rather than Belinda's, that decided the outcome (though Belinda's reasons for acting how she did is only an issue for her own webpage). Also other cases where bribery of public officials is suspected or proven should be mentioned in passing so that one can link to them easily from here (just as other cases where cabinet positions were given or offered as rewards should be mentioned on the Emerson and Stronach pages so that looking up one you can link to other related events) - if the list of names gets too long, one can have one of those "MPs who offered or were offered bribes" lists at the bottom of the page. The pros and cons of electoral reform may come up and be mentioned in passing so that a person can link to a more comprehensive Wikipedia entry on the topic if one wants to explore the issue in depth - and, if a page on the issue exists, a bare summary of the Cadman vote should be put on that page so anyone studying that issue can click on Cadman's name and come here. In other words, bare skeleton information for the purpose of cross referencing would help make Wikipedia a more viable resource.

Finally, Dona Cadman, if she has been nominated to run, should have her own page - though I expect a certain amount of overlap between what is said about her there and what appears here.

POLITICAL CAREER (you can word the following differently, if you wish) a) ELECTORAL HISTORY b) LAW, ORDER AND THE DEATH OF JESSE CADMAN c) OTHER POLITICAL ISSUES* d) THE LAST VOTE**

  • What they are and why they were important to Cadman, famous exchanges with other MPs during Question Period - anyone wanting to do the research, here is Hansard (ie transcripts of Question Period):

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/housechamberbusiness/chambersittings.aspx?View=H&Parl=38&Ses=1&Language=E&Mode=1

  • Start with the sequence of events, then the controversy, end with a paragraph on other MPs/MLAs who were allegedly offered bribes and the whole issue of electoral reform.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.37.48 (talk) 20:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Memorial Service

[edit]

I was one of Mr Cadman's constituents who attended his memorial service today. He was a good man who will be missed. I have added some details of his memorial service to the article. In addition to Penny Priddy, there was another councillor from the City of Surrey who spoke--I did not get her name. I also did not get the name of the gentleman from the Royal Canadian Legion who spoke, nor the name of the woman who gave the emotional speech about Mr Cadman's personal involvement in trying to prevent youth violence. If anyone knows these individuals names, please feel free to add them in to the article.

BillC38 01:55, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Conservative officials named in bribery allegations

[edit]

MP Garth Turner has reported the names of the two Conservative officials who allegedly attempted to bribe Chuck Cadman as Tom Flanagan and Doug Finley (National Director of Political Operations, Conservative Party of Canada).

Should this be included as part of the article?

Shame DSatYVR (talk) 05:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added this information to the article. --  timc  talk   17:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification

[edit]

I've made several changes.

1. (small), based on the facts: Dona Cadman did not witness (or identify) two conservative party officials offering her husband anything; she simply says her husband told her two conservatives did.

I think this is significant since it makes clear there's yet another layer of communication involved. In courts, we always distinguish between directly witnessed testimony and testimony that is hearsay, and for good reason. Same holds here, I think.

2. I've also added in her most recent affidavit and a link to the Ottawa Citizen coverage and Tom Zayaruk's reaction. While I'm unsure of the value (at least on the face of it) of this most recent affidavit, the author's reaction is certainly very worth noting.

3. I've also removed the "bribery" title, and created a separate section titled "legal controversy", moving some content there. Given that the RCMP found no evidence to support charges, and that Harper is proceeding aggressively with a libel suit, I think "legal controversy" is a better title that encapsulates what has happened and is happening. If you'd prefer, "Alleged bribery accusations that were found to be not sufficiently supported by evidence and ensuing libel lawsuit" would also work. Though it might be a bit long. I kind of think "Legal controversy is shorter" and more likely to encapsulate any surprising new developments in this case.

I created the separate section simply because the ensuing investigations and actions in the courts have taken on a life of their own. Holmwood (talk) 16:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chuck Cadman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:39, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chuck Cadman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:14, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chuck Cadman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:55, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chuck Cadman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:04, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chuck Cadman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chuck_Cadman&oldid=1200515369"