Following on my posting earlier this week about last fall's cancelled broadcaster fundraiser for Bev Oda, the story has now generated interest in both the House of Commons and in the mainstream media. NDP Heritage critic Charlie Angus asked Oda during Question Period to explain why the donations appear to have been cashed, but Oda did not respond with House Leader Peter Van Loan stepping to avoid the question. This morning, there is coverage from both the Globe and Mail and the Canadian Press that places the spotlight on both Oda and the contributors, who alternately claim that the money was returned or simply unrelated to the fundraiser.
Oda Fundraising Issue Picks Up Steam
May 4, 2007
Share this post
2 Comments

Law Bytes
Episode 275: David Loukidelis on Why Stripping Privacy Enforcement from Canada’s Privacy Commissioner in Bill C-36 is Unnecessarily Risky Policy
byMichael Geist

Search Results placeholder
Michael Geist on Substack
Recent Posts
Why the Government’s Plan for a Social Media Ban in Bill C-34 Is Unconstitutional
Outdated Data and Dubious Comparisons: Digging into the Government’s AI Strategy Adoption Claims
Why Being Locked Out of Frontier AI is The Sovereignty Threat Canada Missed
Blocked Twice: How Bill C-34’s Kids’ Social Media Ban Would Compound the Online News Act’s Harm to Young Canadians’ News Access
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 275: David Loukidelis on Why Stripping Privacy Enforcement from Canada’s Privacy Commissioner in Bill C-36 is Unnecessarily Risky Policy

Were the donations cashed during Question Period, or did Charlie as the questions during Question Period? Did the House install new bank machines in the building as part of the settlement with the banks?
🙂
N/A
I agree with the first comment. Before trying to write articles, especially critical ones, you should consider taking a few grammar lessons. In lieu of that at least refer to a qualified editor before posting.