Beyond The Commons

 Beyond The Commons

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

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

The language war

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, September 30, 2010 4:41pm - 0 Comments

Not in Ottawa today, and thus couldn’t witness the poetry of Question Period firsthand, but perhaps the transcript speaks for itself.

Conservative members, for instance, combined to use the word “coalition” 15 times, while the Prime Minister seems to have referred to the Liberals as “those characters.”

And Liberal Carolyn Bennett, in wondering whether the Prime Minister would acquiesce to last night’s House vote on the census, apparently observed that “leaders who think they make the rules are called dictators.” In fairness, with the next breath Ms. Bennett said that “this is a test,” so she seems at least willing to offer Mr. Harper the opportunity to prove he is not a dictator. Which is, well, something.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • Mike T.

    Diod they say pirates again? Or rag-tag crew?

  • Emily

    Canadians sigh, and change the channel.

  • LynnTO

    Apparently someone was singing "Hey Big Spender" to Ralph Goodale. Though I doubt that would have made any transcript.

  • Richard_S_Argent

    And we wonder why voter turnout is in a free-fall.

  • Orson Bean

    I guess the next edition of the Oxford English Dictionary should include a new alternative definition of "dictator":

    "an elected leader whom you really really dislike."

    • ZestyMordant

      From the current definition in the Oxford English Dictionary:

      A person who tells people what to do in an autocratic way or who determines behavior in a particular sphere.

      I think "a leader who thinks they make the rules" is a pretty apt summary.

      • Patchouli

        ____Me too, and I know a leader who recently said he thinks he makes the rules.

        Liberal narrative forming up nicely, thanks to input from the PM.

        • Orson Bean

          All they have to do is vote the damn government down in a confidence motion. Why don't they just do that?

          I know of no "dictator" on earth who can be removed from office by a simple confidence motion.

          • bergkamp

            "Is Canada a dictatorship – albeit a friendly dictatorship? In this thoughtful book, Jeffrey Simpson argues that the Liberal Party’s re-election to a third majority government must raise the question: Is Canada in danger of becoming a de facto one-party state, ruled by an all-powerful leader?" The Friendly Dictatorship, Jeffrey Simpson, 2001

            It was ever thus. Prime Ministers have an extraordinary amount of power and leaders from other countries look on with envy when they find out what a Canadian PM can do. However, I do agree 'dictator' is nonsense but our PM does have a lot of power and flexibility between elections.

            What gets me the most is the infantile behaviour of our MPs.

            We pay MPs more than $150,000 a year to attract quality candidates because these people would otherwise be ceo, cfo, exec directors and the like in private sector (according to MPs).

            And I have to say, I just don't see it. I don't believe most of these MPs are capable of running stall at farmer's market but they all think they would be stars in private sector and they are doing us a favour by entering public service.

          • Orson Bean

            At least when Simpson was writing, the Liberals had giant majorities and couldn't be removed from office by way of a simple confidence motion supported by the opposition parties. That fact makes the "dictator" charge against Harper doubly ridiculous.

            Let me guess: Harper the dictator had the RCMP covertly insert microchips into Iggy's, Layton's and Duceppe's brains, through which Harper controls their minds and prevents them from voting down the government on a confidence motion. I'm surprised that Aaron Wherry, Lawrence Martin or the Toronto Star has not broken this shocking expose.

          • frobisher

            Ah, yes. But then many do go on to lucrative 'trophy' positions on boards, at crown corps, law form 'advisory counsel' positions and the like and, ipso-facto, they are private sector geniuses. As they were ever thus. Yet, the capability and talent of farmer's market stall operation still, sadly, eludes them.

  • madeyoulook

    Help me out. Is Harper's "those characters" equivalent to Ignatieff's "these guys" or is one more distasteful than the other?

    • ZestyMordant

      I don't have a problem with either of those.

  • madeyoulook

    And Liberal Carolyn Bennett, in wondering whether the Prime Minister would acquiesce to last night’s House vote on the census, apparently observed that “leaders who think they make the rules are called dictators.”

    Help me out. Is that equivalent to Paul Martin's ignoring the House's vote on a committee's statement that he had lost confidence and Parliament should be dissolved, or is one more distasteful than the other?

    • Orson Bean

      It would certainly be helpful for one or more of the posters who actually know a fair bit about the nuances of parliamentary rules and procedure to weigh in on this — what I'm especially in the dark about is this whole matter of the opposition bringing forth a motion (not a bill), and the extent to which that binds the government to do something. I honestly have no idea what the answer to that is.

      • Orson Bean

        And haven't earlier motions/votes of the House on Omar Khadr and Iraq War resisters essentially raised the same issue, procedurally speaking?

        • Jenn_

          I think you answered your own question. Because obviously, motions aren't binding on the government at all, as per the three or four examples above.

Previous

Next

From Macleans