Read this story from CBC.ca on the lingering questions from its readers relating to the resignation over the weekend of Stephen Harper's Chief of Staff, Nigel Wright. (May 20, 2013)

CBC readers were left with several questions following news that Prime Minister Stephen Harper's chief of staff, Nigel Wright, stepped down on Sunday. His resignation followed revelations that he wrote a $90,000 cheque to repay improperly claimed housing expenses for Senator Mike Duffy.

"My actions were intended solely to secure the repayment of funds, which I considered to be in the public interest, and I accept sole responsibility," Wright said in a statement.

"I did not advise the Prime Minister of the means by which Sen. Duffy's expenses were repaid, either before or after the fact."

The announcement came as something of a surprise to many observers, as the Prime Minister's Office insisted as recently as Friday that Wright had the "full confidence" of the prime minister and would be "staying on."

Wright's resignation sparked swift reaction from Parliament Hill and, likewise, thousands of CBCNews.ca readers took time out of their long weekend to weigh in on the news.

Many felt that Wright's statement and Harper's response to it were vague at best, and evasive at worst. The questions began pouring in on Sunday.

• 'I did not advise the prime minister of the means by which Senator Duffy's expenses were repaid, either before or after the fact,' said Wright. Careful words. Exact words. Keep in mind his legal background. Who did he advise? If Wright wanted to say that Harper didn't know, he would have said so . . .There are way too many unanswered questions . . . We don't need PR or spin, we need the unvarnished truth,"- the crucible
• "I would really like to know why Nigel Wright felt the need to give Duffy a personal cheque," - mettaulysse
• "If his intention was to secure the repayment of funds in the public interest, why didn't he repay the money for all the senators involved?" - pat1959

Several expressed concern over the timing of the issue, noting that the announcement happened on the Victoria Day weekend, and that on Tuesday Harper will fly out to Peru for a trip that will last until the end of the week.

A handful even took the longer view and pushed for the issue to be resolved before the summer recess, which is currently scheduled to begin on June 21.

• "This is happening at an inconvenient time for the rest of us because soon everyone in Harper's caucus, including himself, will disappear for the summer," said Freudian's Slip

Others pointed out that the Senate expenses controversy does not only involve Conservatives.

Senator Mac Harb resigned from the Liberal caucus last week after he was ordered to repay $51,000 in housing and mileage claims by a Senate committee, and some readers feel that he hasn't been subjected to enough scrutiny.

• "When is Harb Mac paying his money back?"said guystone. "Where is his money?,"
• "It's not just CPC senators...Liberal Mac Harb is in big trouble too." said Malabar Front

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity/2013/05/cbc-readers-seek-answers-following-nigel-wrights-resignation.html

If Canadians knew the full extent of the Harper government’s war on science, they would be clamouring for the reinstatement and full funding of dozens of federal scientific programs and hundreds of scientists axed over the past year. Since the passage of omnibus budget Bill C-38, the Harper Cabinet has moved at blitzkrieg speed to make these cuts. But the muzzling of scientists is only one aspect of Harper’s war on science. Far more troubling is the actual elimination of scientific programs and the firing of scientists. Jim Turk, director of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, puts it well: “The Harper government wants politics to always trump science. It wants its political views to dominate even if science shows that it’s wrong.”

It can hardly come as a surprise to anyone that governments – like corporations – employ spin to portray their actions in the best possible light (and to cast their opponents in the worst possible light). Nor is it news that many corporations – and the PR companies they employ – operate a revolving door for helpful politicians. So, should it come as any surprise to learn, as Joyce Nelson reveals in the current issue of Watershed Sentinel, that Peter Kent was appointed as a senior lobbyist by PR giant Hill & Knowlton while he was running as a Conservative candidate in 2008?

MP John Weston's office responds to Rafe Mair's recent column on the Harper Government's sham environmental "process". "Regrettably, [Rafe] has adopted an extremist position, rejecting a Northern Pipeline in principle, no matter what the cost to the community, to jobs, to our country, or to our economy. When asked at a gathering in North Vancouver where heard him speak, he rejected out of hand that a Northern Pipeline should be built, under any circumstance. For my part, I maintain an open mind..." Read Weston's letter and Rafe's subsequent response here.

Ray Grigg discusses revealing insights from a former senior Harper advisor into the way the PM thinks - and how the Idle No More movement, which sprang up in reaction to Harper's policies, will prove challenging for him to deal with. "The Idle No More movement is so diverse and amorphous that it will be difficult to control by the Prime Minister and his powerful PMO. Such a vague and unfocused opponent will be an elusive target for Stephen Harper's vindictiveness. A restless and evolving movement with a wide range of demands will be impossible to manipulate with his secretive strategies."

Read this story from CBC.ca on a letter obtained by Greenpeace through an Access to Information request which demonstrates the oil and gas industry requested and received many of its desired changes to Canada's environmental laws through Conservative Omnibus budget bills. (Jan 9, 2013)

A letter obtained by Greenpeace through access to information laws and passed on to the CBC reveals the oil and gas industry was granted its request that the federal government change a series of environmental laws to advance "both economic growth and environmental performance."

Within 10 months of the request, the industry had almost everything it wanted.

The letter, dated Dec. 12, 2011, was addressed to Environment Minister Peter Kent and Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver. It came from a group called the Energy Framework Initiative (EFI), which is made up of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association, the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute (now the Canadian Fuels Association) and the Canadian Gas Association.

"The purpose of our letter is to express our shared views on the near-term opportunities before the government to address regulatory reform for major energy industries in Canada," wrote the EFI.

The letter specifically mentions six laws that relate to the oil and gas industry's ability to do its work:

• National Energy Board Act.
• Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
• Fisheries Act.
• Navigable Waters Protection Act.
• Species at Risk Act.
• Migratory Birds Convention Act.

On Jan. 9, 2012 (less than one month after the letter was written), Oliver wrote an open letter accusing environmentalists and other "radical groups" of undermining the Canadian economy.

On April 26, 2012, the government introduced the first of its omnibus budget implementation acts which completely re-wrote the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and made major changes to the Fisheries Act and the National Energy Board Act.

On Oct. 18, 2012, the government tabled its second omnibus budget implementation act, which replaced the Navigable Waters Protection Act (one of the oldest pieces of Canadian legislation) with the Navigation Protection Act.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2013/01/09/pol-oil-gas-industry-letter-to-government-on-environmental-laws.html

On January 2, 2013, hundreds of First Nations and non-indigenous people converged on Vancouver's Waterfront Station for the latest Idle No More rally. The beating of drums and singing of traditional songs signaled this crowd's solidarity with the movement that is building across the country and beyond its borders.

2012 was a year that began with Conservative Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver dismissing opponents of the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipelines as "radicals" and ends with the Idle No More rallies sweeping the nation. It was a year when two very different visions for the future of Canada and its place in the world collided headlong with each other. One seeking to curb the Tar Sands and new arteries essential to its growth, the other striving to make Canada into a new Saudi Arabia - provider of oil, gas and coal to emerging Asian markets. Each policy piece from the Harper Government was part of a bigger puzzle, designed to bring this new vision to fruition.

Canadians are seeing red this week after a series of announcements reinforce concerns about the loss of Canadian resources and sovereignty. The focus has been the Alberta Tar Sands, but natural gas plays are also in the mix. Four days after Stephen Harper boldly stated that the CNOOC/Nexen and Petronas/Progress takeovers marked the "end of a trend and not the beginning of one," one of Canada's largest oil and gas companies announced a joint venture in a 4-plus billion dollar gas play in which PetroChina will have a 49.9 percent stake.