Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Hey look: Your seal meat will be served, Excellency

by Paul Wells on Friday, July 16, 2010 9:27am - 0 Comments

My column from this week’s print edition, in which I try again to explain the significance of David Johnston’s selection. It’s the bloody lead time between writing a column and seeing it in print, or online: if I’d known Michael Ignatieff’s bus would break down, I’d have tossed Rideau Hall and other trivia aside and concentrated on the essentials.

Tags: self-promotion

More by Paul Wells

Emily

Harper may be in for a nasty surprise.
http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Emily……don't you wish. Now we are regurgitating the talking points used to defend Dion. Give it a rest Emily. Read the Ottawa Citizen this morning. Even leftie journalists are during on the carpetbagger. The bus trip may be good for talking to Liberals but the rest of us could care less about Ignatieff and want he has to say.

Emily

I'd suggest you have another coffee, but in your case it probably wouldn't help.
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Wrong. As a voter, I care what he has to say. I just wish we could read more about his policy thoughts than the name of the mechanic who knew what to do with the replacement part for the bus.

What I have found so far had been disappointing. But I certainly care to know what the proposed alternative to government is up to.

http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

madeyoulook……I too would like to hear some concrete policies coming out of the mouth of Ignatieff rather than gaffes.

However, after a year and a half of hearing only tripe I have given up. Sending kids overseas to be internationalized. Yeah that will appeal to the masses.

http://intensedebate.com/people/ChrisWPG ChrisWPG

what is "during on the carpetbagger"?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

It's a great old Woody Guthrie song.
http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

ChrisWPG……..my mistake. It should have been turning on the carpetbagger. Thanks for drawing it to my attention.

http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

if I’d known Michael Ignatieff’s bus would break down, I’d have tossed Rideau Hall and other trivia aside and concentrated on the essentials.

Don't worry, I'm sure there will be another Iggy-gaffe to write about any day now.
http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

It’s fantasy to think Harper left the choice of a new governor general to chance.

Just like it is fantasy to think the abolition of the census long form is about protecting privacy.

Incremental change = culture of deceit
wilson

And this is yet another example of why the unelected leader of the opposition should seriously consider that teaching job:

July 5th, Marcel Proulx, the man that led Team Liberal at the hearings said Fadden remarks were not a firing offence

Michael Ignatieff reverses and demands Fadden resignation,
while at the Chinese Cultural Centre in the east end of Toronto.
Not because Fadden lied, but because he may have embarrassed a foreign leader that has spies in Canada and agents trying to influence Canadian politicians
Brian Lilley reports

http://intensedebate.com/people/ChrisWPG ChrisWPG

And this is another example of con-bot talking points.

Kenneth

Is it true or not? I don't know either way and your remark doesn't help me.

http://intensedebate.com/people/ChrisWPG ChrisWPG

Sorry Kenneth, my objective was not to influence your opinion, but to point out the source of the b.s.
http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

It's true.

wilson

(take the teaching job)
Did yah hear the one about
The Liberals boldly announcing that if they win office, they would “put a stop” to plans to issue an untendered, $16-billion contract for a new fleet of fighter jets
– but then conceded that after they review the deal, they might decide a sole-source contract is necessary.

Oh, there's more to the story
''…Canada is likely to pay at least $4 billion for the planes, and one factor that may determine the political fate of the deal is Lockheed’s willingness to buy parts from Canadian suppliers.

Ms. Testa said that Lockheed would buy about $10 billion of components and parts from Canadian aerospace companies as part of the deal….''
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/business/global…

Emily

Harper had a known quantity…a rubber stamp who was publically popular.

Great image, edgy, young, all that.

No GG since 1925 has wanted to face a firestorm like the King-Blyng Fling, but then most of them haven't had minority govts to worry about.

So why Harper wanted a change is a mystery.

But it will be interesting if the new GG turns out to be contrary, and is quite willing to face the predicted firestorm.

wilson

If that's the case, and it may well be, both the govt and opposition (and all those self proclaimed experts on such matters) will accept his response, not so much had it come from a CBC rock star.

Emily

I don't know. It's always been a fear for GGs…being put in an 'impossible' corner was thought to be so dangerous that govts went out of their way not to do so. Harper had no such qualms, and I'm sure all her 'experts' advised her to go along with it.

However, the mood of the country appears to have changed. She was very popular until then…she sank in everyone's view when she agreed, not once, but twice. There was certainly no outcry to keep her in office.

I agree though. Should Johnston prove less compliant, no one has any business complaining after all this touting of his law credentials….even though the constitution isn't his field of law.

wilson

''She was very popular until then…she sank in everyone's view when she agreed, not once, but twice.''
She did not do what you/they hoped she would do,
and that's really the point.
It's about the office of the GG, carrying out the duty, serving at the pleasure of the PM, not that the (hoped for) personal views would swing things your/their way.

Emily

The GG only has one job….being a referee…the rest is window-dressing.

The GG does not 'serve at the pleasure of the PM'…that's US cabinet appointees.

The country was outraged at the prorogues…she didn't do the one real job she had….and he not only got one freebie, but two.

http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Emily…..no you are wrong. The highest polling for the Conservatives came after the GG allowed the prorogation and prevented the coalition of stooges from taking power. She made the right decision and most Canadians agreed with that decision.

The only complaints we hear are from people like you and certain media types who cannot stand the fact the Conservatives are in power. The mood of the country has not changed. It is the desperation of the anti Harper crowd that has changed. They know the writing is on the wall after the next election.

Don't worry you will hear lots about the coalition in the next election and we will see what Canadians think about it.

Emily

I don't talk to Conbots anymore than I talk to Libbots…or for that matter NDPbots, so you're wasting your time.
hollinm

Emily…..you must be very lonely in your world of make believe. What do we call you ….a NObot?

You sure could have fooled all of us that you are not a Lib supporter. Try to spread you venom around to all of the parties then not just the Conservatives.

Wascally Wabbit

@Emily – note – the ConBOT talking points are using misdirection again…point at Michael Ignatieff – who can point to his team of pretty experienced MPs who have some good things on their resumes – as opposed to the Presidential theme of Mr. Wells' article! They hope that the public won't start to really key in on Harper's pattern of actions. He can't call Ignatieff arrogant on the one hand – and hope that they don't see the kettle calling the pot black!
Me – I see it more in democratic terms. The last two polls – the online one and the telephone one – had the CPC at low to mid 30s – while the combination of NDP and Liberals – in both polls – was 47%. Hard for Mr. Harper to argue that Canadians want a Conservative government – when that's the best number he can raise! Whether or not Mr. Ignatieff can turn this road trip into a love-in remains to be seen – but at least HE has Box #2 – a coalition – in his back pocket.

http://intensedebate.com/people/hollinm hollinm

Wascally Wabbit…….the fact is votes are not fungible. So until there is an election it does not matter what each of your friends get in the polls. What counts is what happens on election day. However, nobody will accept the coalition idea unless the Libs win more seats than the Conservatives and then try to join the NDP in a coalition. With the combined forces they would need to have a majority. Otherwise we are in to the same situation we are today.

The coalition argument only favours the Conservatives in an election campaign. Canadians saw what happened the last time and it will be a powerful argument for Harper that anything less than a majority government will see more shenanigans and political instability. On the other hand if Ignatieff talks about a coalition he is admitting he can't win. He loses either way.

no more non-partisan

I still prefer Mendes's speculation
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/a…
herringchoker

The lesson here: the early bird doesn't always get the worm.
Olaf

Paul,

You said "at least three others have strong opinions about the role of the GG", pointed to evidence that one does (which was a good catch, by the way), and then to evidence that the other two have strong opinions on an entirely different subject (judicial activism).

Is there any evidence that Manfredi's or Knopff's views on judicial activism are relevant to whether or not they'd be more likely to pick a pliant GG, or are you just saying that they're ideologically conservative and therefore will pick a GG that will thoughtlessly defer to Harper?

And are you saying they were successful in their dishonest efforts to choose a lapdog GG, or just that such was obviously their intention?