Beyond The Commons

Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

The Commons: A day like any other

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, June 17, 2010 8:35pm - 40 Comments

The Scene. As Bob Rae began the first question of the last Question Period before this third session of the 40th Parliament pauses for the summer, a respectful silence took hold.

The subject matter was this morning’s release of the final report from the inquiry into the Air India bombing. Mr. Rae commended the government and the inquiry’s commissioner. The Prime Minister stood and added his thanks to Justice Major. Mr. Rae probed for specific details of the government’s expected response, Mr. Harper offered assurances. The two danced quite delicately on the edge of combativeness, this adversarial system at its most sensitive.

Not until the Speaker called on the polarizing member for Ajax-Pickering, the Liberal Mark Holland, did the noise return to the chamber, government members groaning and moaning as Mr. Holland abruptly and loudly changed topics.

“Mr. Speaker, when next week’s G8 summit starts, world leaders will not visit $50 million in unfinished mud parks, bridges, gazebos and a sunken boat paid for in their names,” Mr. Holland reported. “While world leaders cannot visit unfinished pork, tourists will not be going to Toronto. The U.S. just issued a travel advisory not to visit Toronto during the G8. At the height of the tourist season, Conservatives are shutting down Toronto. The Economist magazine is now calling the $1 billion in waste a ‘loonie boondoggle.’ How much more of an international embarrassment can this get?”

To this facetious provocation, Lawrence Cannon stood contrite and humble to mouth just enough platitudes about security concerns to fill the time allotted for response.

Mr. Holland tried again. “Here is the problem,” he clarified. “Conservatives approved $50 million in projects under the banner of the G8 that have nothing, zero, to do with the summit. This is not a gazebo and ice rink sales convention. It is a world leaders’ meeting on international debt. I am not talking about the $500,000 they spent on the bunny hop trail or the $50 million and other pork shoved into the minister’s riding. I am talking about this G8 legacy fund, a bonus $50 million for the minister in the name of the summit that has nothing to do with the summit at all. How do they justify this?”

This was closer to a direct question, but the minister in question—the frequently tweeting Tony Clement—stayed seated so that John Baird might stand and emphatically proclaim the government’s good and noble works on behalf of the Canadian people. “Mr. Speaker, the government has done some 12,000 infrastructure projects in every corner of the country,” he reported. “We have two major goals as part of our economic action plan. One is to create badly needed jobs in the short term, and second is to improve public infrastructure in the long term. We are accomplishing both of those objectives. We have seen, since July, the creation of more than 300,000 new jobs. Our plan is working.”

This being the last sitting before Parliament’s summer recess, the day was otherwise consumed with much pausing for reflection. Michael Ignatieff and Jack Layton convened news conferences to expound on the efforts of their respective sides. In the moments before Question Period, the government sent up one of their dutifully elected news release readers to proclaim the government’s accomplishment. Mr. Layton lamented the “visionless” government and the “tired” official opposition. Mr. Ignatieff lamented for the intimidation and partisanship of Mr. Harper’s side. The news release reader complained of the opposition’s mudslinging. And so it was that everyone was agreed that something was wrong and that someone else was primarily to blame.

“Government is us,” Mr. Layton had offered at one point. And so here we are.

The arena of our democracy was at it usually is, a mix of aspersion, sorrow, frustration, self-righteousness and triumphalism. Adjectives were exchanged, explanations were demanded, voices were raised, facts were asserted and claims made. Each side cheered their own. Carefully scripted lines were read into the record.

Wayne Easter whined and the government side jeered. Dominic LeBlanc happily taunted the Justice Minister off camera. The Bloc Quebecois mounted an omnibus list of grievances on behalf of its namesake province. The NDP called on others to follow their lead and the government side groaned. There were questions about agriculture policy, the Sydney harbour and lighthouses.

Maxime Bernier showed up in a handsome three-piece suit. Michael Chong sat quietly and observed, perhaps plotting revolution. Ralph Goodale attempted a straightforward question. A government backbencher was sent up to ask a rhetorical question of a minister. When the accusations grew too numerous, the Conservative side employed John Baird as a distraction. Rodger Cuzner stood and very nearly screamed himself into a broken rib. Keith Ashfield rose and did what he could to ward off suggestions of impropriety.

In a way, the opposition held the other side to account. In a way, the government was made to explain itself. Either way, we were provided another 45-minute demonstration of who and what we have here and, ultimately, what is us.

When it was all over, the Prime Minister crossed the aisle and caught Mr. Rae’s attention. The two found seats in the opposition front row and sat for awhile as the House proceeded with other business. The conversation, whatever the topic, seemed altogether friendly and respectful.

The Stats. Quebec, 10 questions. The G20, eight questions. Air India, four questions. Agriculture, ethics, the Sydney harbour and lighthouses, two questions each. Crime, taxation, poverty, labour, foreign affairs and the oil industry, one question each.

Stephen Harper, seven answers. Keith Ashfield, four answers. Lawrence Cannon and John Baird, three answers each. Rona Ambrose, Gerry Ritz, James Moore, Dave Anderson and Jim Prentice, two answers each. Jim Flaherty, Denis Lebel, Jason Kenney, Diane Finley, Vic Toews, Rob Nicholson, Gail Shea, Lisa Raitt and Deepak Obhrai, one answer each.

Bookmark and Share
  • SpenBC

    The government is fine. The problem is the Lying leftards who know nothing but fabrication of non issues, obstruction and kangaroo courts. Enough Canadians know this not to give your analysis much credit.

    • DeanP

      Read talking points much?

  • john

    Wherry with a poetic description of the final day of perhaps one of the most chaotic episodes in Canadian governance history.

  • chet

    Suddenly a prorogue became a dirty word, suddenly meeting with fellow nations in a blanket of security became a lavish trivialty akin to having a summer home in France (unless such a trivialty is at the hands of a leftist leader in which case a summer French home is a noble right not to be mentioned in polite company).

    And of course such sudden urgencies overshadow such trivialties of our economic well being, and a story told round the world, except in the leftist media in Canada – that of our vastly superior economy.

    Bread and butter is now ignored, and partisan leftist candy rules the day.

  • chet

    The partisan leftists in the media are incapable of looking in the mirror, always self assured in the righteousness of fighting the true scourge…non progressive conservatism,

    but when the partisan fog of the moment clears, the real story of this session will be the continued downfall of the media who long ago left the true news telling business in the world of politics, and instead entered the fray on the side of the "correct" team.

    • DeanP

      and you're saying Tories aren't partisan? Can you even define the word "leftist," or do you just recite buzzwords? Basically, you are reciting the punch line but do you even get the joke?

      • chet

        tories are supposed to be partisan,

        so are the Liberals,

        the "impartial media" not so much.

        That you can't even distinguish between the leftists in the media and their cohorts in their chosen party, makes my point nicely.

    • The Real Jan

      Do not despair, chet, Harper's going to get you your very own television channel.

      • chet

        The Liberals have had their own channel(s), papers, educational institutions (dare to be a conservative on our "free thinking" campuses these days and feel the scorn),

        the notion that the "correct" lockstep view will no longer be,

        has the authoritarian left terrified.

        And so they should be.

        BTW, the absence of complete and total progressive mindset isn't "right wing" its called balanced and that's what the Fox News of the north will be.

  • no more non-partisan

    Why did Ignatieff in his session-end interview today refer to the GG as Canada's "head of state"? Was he out of the country for the debate we had last year? There is a pamphlet that every Ontario school kid of Ignatieff's era was issued with called "How We Are Governed". Someone should send him a copy.

    I can't find a video of the news conference but he was asked about the GG appointment.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

    I presume Harper and Rae were no doubt talking about the Air India inquiry given Rae's past involvement with the families.

  • dave

    Nah, they're just having merger discussions…

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/psiclone psiclone

      ooh Ouch! – you never know though canadian politics can change overnite and it wouldn't surprise me one iota!

  • jarrid

    The following exchange took place in QP on Wednesday. This exchange did not make into Mr. Wherry's QP narrative for that day:

    "Harper raised the rhetorical bar even higher on Wednesday, asserting “the deputy leader of the NDP knew full well what she was saying. She made statements that could have been made by Hamas, Hezbollah or anybody else with no repercussions from that party whatsoever.”

    When Layton returned to the charge, criticizing Michael Ignatieff for suggesting a continuing role for Canadian troops in Afghanistan, Harper pounced again: “Quite frankly, I do not think that a leader who shelters an MP who makes anti-Israeli extremist statements without repercussion should be making any criticism of (Liberal) policy.”

    At which point Layton pivoted and walked out of the House at once looking wan and winded, discouraged and disgusted. He knew he’d been had by Harper." (H/T Ian MacDonald)

    Aaron overlooked that particular exchange. It doesn't fit into Aaron's narrative I guess.

  • jarrid

    An absolutely must read article in today's Ottawa Citizen by John Robson. It is a must-read article, especially for the left of center commenters here. In an extremely well-written article, he warns the mainstream left to take anti-semistism seriously. He ends his column with these words:

    "Anti-Semitism is wicked and grotesque. Please do not let it seep into the mainstream left."

    Fellow left of center commenters, take that warning to heart. And please read the article linked at the Liberal-leaning National Newswatch.

    • jarrid

      I've got a -1 for pointing out an article about the dangers of anti-semitism for the left. Looks like the warning is going unheeded I guess.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/tobyornotoby tobyornotoby

      Maybe if the right-leaning media and pundits were a little more judicious about the application of the term anti-semitism and didn't use it interchangeably with "critic of Israel" there would be more respect for this concern.

      • Bonko

        Oh, right, and leftists never make fake claims of racism/sexism/homphobia.

        I deplore race hustling of all kinds but I gotta tell you I am enjoying watching the left being painted as anti-semites. I'm enjoying it a lot. It's almost entirely false, which makes it even more enjoyable.

        Your side has been falsely smearing right wingers as bigots for decades and it's just faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaabuolus to see it happen to you for once. Ha!

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/bergkamp bergkamp

          "It's almost entirely false, which makes it even more enjoyable."

          Don't be so sure.

          "To evaluate just how large a role, we conducted a study (part of a larger survey of 2,768 American adults) in which we explored people’s responses to the economic collapse and tried to determine how anti-Semitic sentiments might relate to the ongoing financial crisis ….. Interestingly, Democrats were especially prone to blaming Jews: …."
          http://bostonreview.net/BR34.3/malhotra_margalit….

          • Bonko

            It's a spurious relationship; latinos and blacks and especially women don't have to answer to political correctness, and they make up the Democrats' base. It would be more accurate, but still wrong, to say blacks and latinos and women tend towards antisemitism rather than democrats. The GOP is the white man's party, and no white man is going to admit to a pollster any antisemitic feelings, if he has any to begin with.

            Both the Dems and the Liberals have enjoyed 80%+ of the Jewish vote for decades. You're suggesting the vast majority of Jews vote for anti-semitic parties, and that just doesn't fly. Jews in North America are notoriously left wing, always have been, always will be.

            Jews are vastly overrepresented on Wall Street, 50% by some counts, and both Greenspan and Bernacke are Jewish. In this context I'm not sure that blaming Jews for the financial crisis is necessarily anti-semitic, especially in the wake of the Madoff scam, or even false. The study isn't logical, it automatically assumes criticism of Jews to be anti-semitic. It's not.

            One more thing: President Lulu of Brazil blamed the crisis on, quote, "people with blue eyes". WASPs are actually under represented on Wall Street and in corporate America and in any case only make up a fraction of both. As a blue eyed Anglo Saxon I'm not happy the rest of the world is blaming us very specifically for something that, as a matter of record, we did not do, and if that means highlighting the extreme over-representation of Jews on Wall Street in order to defend ourselves then that is perfectly cricket.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/bergkamp bergkamp

      "Please do not let it seep into the mainstream left."

      Too late. Everyone knows that you scratch a left wing type you find an anti-semite within.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/tobyornotoby tobyornotoby

        Case in point.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/MostlyCivil MostlyCivil

        "Everyone knows that you scratch a left wing type you find an anti-semite within."

        Everyone also knows that vaccines cause autism, Jesus had children and Freemasons run the world. We're just waiting for proof. Like you.

      • CAPS

        While I almost always disagree with you, the fact that you socred one of the most amazing ogals in Worl Cup history at least gives me a soft spot for you:

        [youtube 5FlalZcbTJs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FlalZcbTJs youtube]

        • bergkamp

          Thanks for link CAPS. It was treat to watch on lovely sunny afternoon.

          I lived in England and saw many Arsenal matches. Bergkamp and Tony Adams were my favourite.

          Are you watching England v Algeria?

  • Incredible

    Yes the Opposition is tired, exhausted would be more like it, have you ever tried to make a person, with absolutely no scruples, whatsoever, act in a proper manner?

  • Bonko

    “Mr. Speaker, when next week’s G8 summit starts, whawhawhawhah, etc.”

    As if a party led by a self-described "tax and spend Liberal" gives a crap about taxpayer money.

    Do you have a link for that claim Bonko?

    Why, yes, I'm glad you asked. Here's Michael Ignatieff on Evan Solomon's show describing himself not once but twice as a "tax and spend liberal":

    "Certain parts of me are utterly unchanged, I’m a kind of Pierre Trudeau, gay marriage, tax and spend liberal on the social domestic side, pretty well unchanged since the sixties, in fact confirmed by events."

    Now, the term tax and spend liberal is always used as a pejorative – unless you are a potential leader of a party of greedy self-interested leeches. The guy *actually* *bragged* about being a tax and spend liberal. Here he is again, same interview, in case the greedy Liberal mooches missed it the first time:

    "That is I’m not an apologist for Bush, I’m a blue-state tax and spend liberal as I’ve said"

    Twice in a matter of seconds Liberal Party of Canada leader Michael Ignatieff bragged that he was a tax and spend Liberal.
    Why would he do that you ask? Because Liberals are so greedy and selfish that he did it to gain their support during a leadership race; it's actually a selling point!

    The CBC deleted the link, good thing we have the waybackwhen machine:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20080209170858/http://…

    We've proven beyond any doubt that the greedy selfish Liberal Party of Canada is led by a self described tax and spend Liberal, so it is in fact ridiculous of them to criticize the Tories about excessive spending.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/MostlyCivil MostlyCivil

      Sure, he SAYS he's a Tax and Spend Liberal, but so far he's a piker compared to the guy in charge.

      The current PM spells "Conservative" with a small "l" and a silent "C".

    • DeanP

      At least he's a tax and spend Liberal (i.e. pay for things with money we have), rather than a borrow and spend Conservative (i.e. make our children pay for it.)

      • Orson Bean

        Funny that Ignatieff invoked Trudeau as his inspiration, then. Because Trudeau & Company borrowed and spent like it was going out of style. Trudeau, Lalonde, Donald MacDonald and the whole wrecking crew had no problem with making our children pay for it.

        And by the way, is Iggy on record as saying he's going to raise the GST? Because merely cancelling a planned corporate tax cut is not going to vault us back into the black. So where is the revenue going to come from in Iggy's master plan?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/auntie_em_m auntie_em_m

    All these party mouths. Take a vacation. Please.

  • Incredible

    That's funny, I'm just a bit left of center type but not an anti-semite..

    Harper is a great defender of Isreal, we all should be. But let's make sure we look at all sides realizing no one is perfect here, until we can do that, nothing will be attained, including the right of the Jewish people to live in peace. And I suppose that is what it's all about, isn't it.

    However, I must admit there is a question I keep asking myself about Harper's support of Isreal…

    How much of it's poltical consideration when it comes to his base, the somewhat extreme Christian Religeous Right and their interpertation of the bible?

    To be fair, I should also make it clear, I don't think Harper has a sliver of scruple in his perfectly thatched cranium and I guess that may be the reason I've just questioned Harper's tunnel vision support of Isreal.

    I apologize for not accepting the possibility Harper may be doing something devoid of personal political consideration.

    I'm a terribly cynical bugger, aren't I.

    • Bonko

      "How much of it's poltical consideration when it comes to his base, the somewhat extreme Christian Religeous Right and their interpertation of the bible?"

      That's an accusation, not a sincere question, but the answer is about .2398 E^-81%, seeing as they represent about that percentage of the population and have about that much political pull. It's just more Christian bashing by Christian hating atheists.

      but I'm not an atheist, I'm a…

      Yeah, whatever, save it.

      • Incredible

        I've got a evangilical on the line.

        • Wallace Cleaver

          No, Bonko is a Trotskyite.

  • DeanP

    $930-million worth of publicity

    The staggering cost of the G20 made us wonder how much advertising could be had for nearly a billion dollars

    * Every billboard in Times Square for 12 years
    * Every commercial in 6 U.S. Super Bowl broadcasts*
    * Every ad in Vogue magazine for 3.6 years**
    * 5,816 full-colour, full-page ads in national editions of the Sunday New York Times
    * 18.6 billion impressions on USA Today’s iPad application

    * assuming low inflation

    ** based on 2009 ad sales

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/MichaelCayley MichaelCayley

    Jack Layton vs. Bob Rae: the battle we deserve
    http://redliberals.ca/2010/06/15/jack-layton-vs-b…

  • Crit_Reasoning

    Three blissful months until the next QP. Wherry must be jumping for joy.

  • Reader

    Stumbled on a that sorrowful clip of yours:

    [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57ta7mkgrOU ]

  • chet

    A non leftist partisan might conclude that what this 'chaotic' minority situation just might need as a good 'ol fashioned majority government for awhile.

    The average Canadian can think for themselves, and inherently knows that such things as the 105th prorogation can't possibly be the end of Canadian democracy as we know it (the previous 104 not even being worthy of note),

    that whether a wafer is eaten, or a Taliban butcher slapped in the face half way round the world is of no moment to our lives, except to the hyperpartisans on the left and their enablers in the leftist media who see these relative trivialties as desperate lifelines to power from which to attempt to gin up faux controversies.

From Macleans