Sounds like sour grapes to me. I think Dona Cadman should run for whichever party Dona Cadman wants too. The Conservative party is a good party filled with people fairly new to being in government and they make mistakes. We've certainly let the Liberals make their fair share.

Well, perhaps we did, but ultimately they paid the price.

I believe the *mistake* you are referring to occurred when the Conservatives were still in opposition, desperate to become the government.

"Former" anything should have a shelf life !!

Even milk has a shelf life, but not a decade plus......

Like anything else that "old", it smells.

Elaine/Ben, why would you even bother to title an article this way.....

Chuck Cadman was what we want our representatives to be. Hardworking, intelligent and possessing the greatest integrity.

Dona Cadman has known about these alleged bribes for years. Yet she still put her name forward for nomination to represent the conservative party.

The only thing that has changed is that it's public knowledge now.

Why would she go independent now?

I think she probably would win if she did, but that is besides the point.

Having said that, it's pretty disappointing if these allegations are proven true.

I think Dona is a dunz, so it would be no big loss for the conservatives if she did go her own way. I think it is possible its her misunderstanding of the whole life insurance situation that sparked this whole affair and if she can't understand an issue as close to her as that, then she has no place representing people.

IMO its looking more and more like parliamentary life insurance is flawed and breeds corruption of votes in situations like Chucks as an implication of the policies themselves. That is what really needs to be investigated.

All Chuck did was vote to keep parliament intact regardless of implication to anyone else but himself... so that his family could receive maximum payout from the parliamentary life insurance policy.

Likely the conservative operatives were offering Chuck a free uncontested pass in the event his vote brought down the government and an election was triggered... possibly some funding to help with his election campaigning... thereby ensuring he remains in parliament to collect his full entitlement to parliamentary life insurance.

Chucks choice was to take the route that leaves a dignified, in his own way, last stand. To support the conservatives and then trigger an election in which he would have to run in that election, for which he could likely be dead by the time of the election... would not be a dignified way to go (Harper called it); even if you still got the full insurance entitlement for your family....

If the story deviates from that kind of outline then I think we have a serious problem.

I don't agree that "...Dona is a dunz" and neither are her daughter and son-in-law who have spoken publicly about the attempt at...
(I do not dare to say what I wish to say for fear of... ).

I think the *dunces* are us (the voters) who don't insist on action when it is required.