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: This government of powerless men

by Aaron Wherry on Tuesday, November 2, 2010 7:02pm - 0 Comments

The Scene. Once more, Ralph Goodale stood and beseeched the Prime Minister to explain himself, at least as it pertains to the potential sale of Saskatchewan’s PotashCorp. To his credit, the Prime Minister stood and did just that. Which is to say, he rose and explained that he and his position were in this case entirely irrelevant.

“I can assure him,” Mr. Harper assured Mr. Goodale, “the Minister of Industry will make a decision according to a legal process.”

Unsatisfied, Mr. Goodale turned to the Minister of Agriculture, wondering if perhaps the honourable Gerry Ritz, the elected representative for a larger parcel of land in Saskatchewan, might have something to say about the matter. Mr. Ritz leaned forward as if willing to respond, but it was Tony Clement who stood, the Industry Minister so emboldened as to refer to himself in the third person.

“There is a process under the Investment Canada Act which leads to the assessment by the Minister of Industry of the net benefit to Canada test,” he said of himself. “That is what is being done and that will be delivered to the people of Canada in the due course of time.”

One will forgive Mr. Clement if he lingers for the fullness of this allotted time, if he revels in this newfound regard. For in this moment, Tweeting Tony is quite possibly the most powerful man in Ottawa.

Scoff if you will. But in a land where no man dare admit responsibility, the technically authoritative is king. At a time when none will accept blame, exalted should be those who, having been passed the buck, are compelled to say it stops with them, if only by law. In this game of hot potato it is Mr. Clement who holds the starchy foodstuff high.

Consider this matter of interprovincial squabbling between Quebec and Newfoundland. “Mr. Speaker,” said the Prime Minister, when pressed on the issue by Gilles Duceppe, “there is a legal process to resolve this issue.”

Mr. Duceppe tried again. The Prime Minister shrugged, powerless. “Mr. Speaker,” he explained, “energy development is a provincial responsibility.”

Liberal Bryon Wilfert pressed the Defence Minister to explain the lack of an open competition before the government proceeds with the purchase of new fighter jets. The Defence Minister rose and, as he has repeatedly before, explained that the current government was merely following a process launched by the previous government he so otherwise despises.

The Veterans Affairs Minister was asked by Liberal Kirsty Duncan to account for reported shortcomings in the Veterans Charter. “I remind her that it was her government that adopted the new Veterans Charter in 2005,” he scolded of an initiative his predecessor was seemingly quite happy to champion four years ago.

The Foreign Affairs Minister was pressed to explain an agreement that will see Omar Khadr returned to Canada in a years time. As he did the day before, Lawrence Cannon stood to explain that his government had nothing to do with anything.

New Democrat Linda Duncan lamented for the recent harmonization of federal and provincial sales taxes in British Columbia and its effects on Alberta businesses. “Provincial taxation is a provincial responsibility in Canada,” shrugged Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, he who openly lobbied for the policy and whose government has financially compensated those provinces which have followed suit.

Lastly then it was the NDP’s Pat Martin who rose to colourfully hector the aforementioned Mr. Ritz—”Gerrymander,” Mr. Martin called him—about trouble with the eternally troublesome Canadian Wheat Board. Gosh, lamented Mr. Ritz, he would love to make improvements to the institution, but the Liberals and New Democrats keep blocking his reforms.

Alas. Nearly five full years after it took power, this government still so struggles to grasp power. (Or, put another way, just five years after taking office, Mr. Harper has realized his dream of a limited, largely powerless, central government.)

It was to wonder why the Prime Minister himself had even bothered to show up this day, why he had not simply left an arrow on his desk pointing in the general direction of the Industry Minister. But midway through this afternoon’s session, a dutiful backbencher was sent up to ask if Mr. Harper might stand and say something about the plight of David Chen, the Toronto grocer who has recently been celebrated for chasing down and detaining a shoplifter. The Prime Minister was only too happy to assert his authority in this regard.

“Now that the case has been ruled on and common sense has prevailed,” Mr. Harper told the House, “this government, myself and the Minister of Justice, have instructed the Department of Justice and instructed officials to look at possible changes to the Criminal Code to prevent incidents like Mr. Chen’s from occurring again.”

So the lines of authority are thus drawn. With the Industry Minister be given power over national resources and the rest of the cabinet charged with the redirection of all other concerns, Mr. Harper will be allowed to devote his full attention to rewriting the Criminal Code for the benefit of beleaguered corner store shopkeeps.

The Stats. Foreign investment, six questions. Veterans, four questions. Crime, three questions. Energy, natural resources, the military, ethics, Omar Khadr, foreign aid, bilingualism, Nigel Wright, arts funding and sports, two questions each. Internet access, taxation, aboriginal affairs, Quebec, the disabled, Iran, infrastructure and the Canadian Wheat Board, one question each.

Stephen Harper, seven answers. James Moore, six answers. Jean-Pierre Blackburn and John Baird, four answers each. Tony Clement and Lawrence Cannon, three answers each. Christian Paradis, Peter MacKay, Jim Abbott and Rob Nicholson, two answers each. Jim Flaherty, John Duncan, Denis Lebel, Diane Finley, Chuck Strahl and Gerry Ritz, one answer each.

Bookmark and Share
  • tobyornotoby

    Betty White is running Canada. Quick someone get a Snickers bar!

  • Emily

    Only Clement is dumb enough to volunteer for a hanging.

    • Margaret

      SO dumb. He is such a goof. Looks goofier and dumber all the time.

      • Horatio

        He may look goofy, but he's against government coercion. He's also…. wait, no, that's it.

  • hollinm

    You guys really are a pack of partisan hacks. There is no way the government can nor should they comment on the Potash deal before it has been publicly announced. Of course that does not stop the bloviating Goodale from yelling he wants to know. In good time my children. In good time. In the meantime relax, take a blood pressure pill and all will be revealed in the fulness of time.
    Its interesting. As the polls continue to show the Libs going nowhere in those polls the comments become more vitriolic, mean and frankly desperate. Enjoy yourselves boys and girls.

    • tobyornotoby

      What about Lawrence Cannon? Is he allowed to talk about the Khadr decision after it was made, or will that bias the markets in some way?

      • Al O'Wishes

        But that was different because it involved er… well… um… OMG THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING! QUICK, BUY SOME JETS!

    • ZestyMordant

      Well that's certainly patronizing.

      • hollinm

        It was meant to be. Have you read some of the posts on this blog. Many have nothing to do with the subject matter. It is just about calling people names, misrepresenting facts or simply spin for the sake of spin.
        As I said as the Libs increasingly go nowhere under the leadership of Iffy and I do mean Iffy the comments become more desperate trying to malign the government in anyway possible.
        The fact remains it is the angry opposition party supporters who are desperate for somebody to listen to them so they rant on boards like this. So far the vast silent majority called ordinary Canadians are not listening to their pleas with polls continuing to show the Conservatives in the lead.
        The Potash deal reminds me of all the other hyperventilating done by the partisans on this blog. This will be the end of Harper, this will be the end of Harper etc. etc.

        • ZestyMordant

          It is just about calling people names…Iffy and I do mean Iffy

          Well that's certainly hypocritical.

          party supporters who are desperate for somebody to listen to them so they rant on boards like this.

          I suspect that your subconscience knows who you are talking about here. Regardless of your politics, I feel sorry for you hollinm.

        • pivnick

          hollinm: "The fact remains it is the angry opposition party supporters who are desperate for somebody to listen to them so they rant on boards like this. So far the vast silent majority called ordinary Canadians are not listening to their pleas with polls continuing to show the Conservatives in the lead."

          The key thing that you mentioned here was silent. Its not that they aren't listening, its that they don't even know the issues. Anyone who bothers to go onto Macleans website, and at least tries to read an article about question period is well ahead of the average canadian. Lets remember that barely half our population voted in the last election. Thats not a silent population – that a blind, deaf, and mute one – infinitely more scary then a misguided partisan attacks. Ignorance isn't not knowing – it's no caring.

    • gottabesaid

      Holy crap, I agree with you. Sort of. I don't mind folks hyperventilating over the Potash question — I think it's a horrible idea to let it fall into foreign hands, and it is a very important issue. But who gives a rat's butt who's decision it is? It's going to hang, politically, on Harper and his government, whether Clement is the actual decision maker or not. So, as hollinm says, chillax. Just make sure the point is made to keep the company in Canadian hands.

      • Reverend_Blair

        There's a reason why Clement is taking all the questions on this. Some people vote for MPs, some people vote for the party leader. Nobody in Saskatchewan votes for an MP from Ontario though. Harper is doing damage control and nothing but damage control here. He knows the decision will hurt politically and he's trying to minimize that.

        Personally, I don't think it's working. I'd love to see his party's internal numbers in Saskatchewan right now. My guess is they've fallen off a cliff. I talked to an NDP stalwart there today who has gone from hoping to pick up a seat or two in the next election to thinking four or five seats might be in reach.

        • Richard_S_Argent

          And you know what more NDP seats means right? C-c-c-c-oalition!!!

          oooooh! scary! (a la Count Floyd ;)

  • Margaret

    Comparisons have been made to the NEP, in fact. lolol

    • dougrogers

      Well, if the Liberals did it, it must be okay.

  • Anon 001

    David Chen = Chinese people = voting bloc = 905 = majority = absolute power = yum yum

    • MostlyCivil

      You might want to lay off those snickers bars, there, Sunny Jim.

  • Harpers Gut

    The only nation in the western world where Tony Clement can work as a minister… sigh…

    • Sigh

      I'm trying to think of any nation in the eastern world that would give him a ministerial job.

      • Reverend_Blair

        i wouldn't trust him to feed the cats for a weekend.

        • Stewart_Smith

          Oh come on, how soon we all forget.

          Remember if you fall in a river, you can count on Tony to leave his dinner table, jump into the river and then climb out, while his noble wife saves your skin. Tony Clement: Hero (ineffective hero, but still…)

  • NorthernPoV

    true words indeed:
    "this government still so struggles to grasp",
    anything substantive really,

    They say Harper enjoys his job. Hard to believe as you watch him as he points the finger at other gov'ts (past, provincial or foreign) or hides behind weak ministers on virtually all issues. What leadership! (Is his strategy to, bore us to death? I think it's starting to work – based on a sample of one. ;-)

    And on the one issue where he deigned to give an opinion, it was a self-contradicting statement.
    ie If it went so well, why would they need to mess with….err FIX it?

    • Blue

      To those who are new here it must seem scandalous to have a blogger like Wherry pen such bull$hit as that above that would have to be toned down to even appear on Lib Blogs.
      Let me tell you what Joe Volpe did in QP today . His high pitched scream could be heard down on Sparks St. as he attempted to ask a crime question of the Justice minister.
      Apparently Joe`s new found interest in crime and punishment has a lot to do with the fact that the Liberals will probably lose the by-election in Vaughn to the CPC candidate—a Mr. Julian Fantino.
      Justice minister Nicholson skillfully reminded Volpe that he should keep that interest on alert level the next time the Gov`t has a Crime Bill.

      • Jan

        I would think Fantino might be a walk in – except for that little incident at Caledonia.

      • Blue

        The previous story about screaming Joe and his convenient caring about crime would never be seen in one of Wherry`s missals to his devoted following.
        I feel it would be a good idea to enlighten them on ocassion about what really goes on in QP—-lend a little balance to their lives—maybe some of you with far better communication skills than I could help out with the flock.

        • kcm

          this is AW's blog, if you don't like it get your own.

          'Apparently Joe`s new found interest in crime and punishment has a lot to do with the fact that the Liberals will probably lose the by-election in Vaughn to the CPC candidate—a Mr. Julian Fantino.
          Justice minister Nicholson skillfully reminded Volpe that he should keep that interest on alert level the next time the Gov`t has a Crime Bill.'

          So we can rest assured that you have in fact researched Volpes views on crime can we? Otherwise we might not have any idea whether you are BSing right? Somehow i suspect you might have little or no interest in balance and quite a bit in apple polishing for your favourite party.

          • MostlyCivil

            "he attempted to ask a crime question of the Justice minister."

            Actually, the "attempted" part reads rather like Wherry…Seems he emulates the one he despises…

          • Blue

            " no interest in balance and quite a bit in apple polishing for your favourite party " is exactly what Wherry does in his every day reporting. I`m well aware this is Wherry`s blog. I am just hoping that some sense of balance might appear in a few comments.

            I can assure you I did as much research on Volpe`s views on crime as Wherry did on federal-provincial responsibility, on legal process and of course on mind-reading.

          • kcm

            'I can assure you I did as much research on Volpe`s views on crime as Wherry did on federal-provincial responsibility, on legal process and of course on mind-reading'

            So all we have from you on your first attempt is empty assertion and possible distortion and or misreprsentation of an MPs views on crime…in other words that's your best attempt at balance. You're free to dislike AW's take on Parliamentary affairs – lots of others would agree with you – but he's a pro and i can't remember a time anyone has faulted his facts [ as opposed to opinions]; whereas it appears you can't backup your very first assertion.

          • Blue

            " empty assertion and possible distortion and or misrepresentation of an MP`s views " Once again you have pegged Wherry`s style. Are you his agent ?

            Wherry is a professional. He should have more facts available than you or I.

            The government recognizes that there is a dividing line between federal and provincial powers. They recognize that the Potash decision will be made through a legal process on Wednesday. Therefore is it factual for a reporter to use these two points to declare that the government is powerless on Tuesday ?

          • kcm

            You don't enjoy irony? Maybe you should take this blog a little less seriously – i see it as Aaron having some fun. You want a stenographer. I can go to the NP blogs and find opinions that differ from mine on any given day…i'm certainly not going to waste my time telling them to interpret "facts" as i think they should.

  • Richard_S_Argent

    So….how much are we enjoying all that accountability we were promised in 2006?

    • dougrogers

      I think you'll see it soon enough, when the CPC dissembles long enough, federal government is disassembled… in favor of provinces and city states run by corporations, the accountability will come right out of your pocket as always.

      Oooh, scary slippery slope fantasy ungrounded in reality….

  • Patchouli

    Wonderful headline!

  • Peter

    There will always be a case of stalemate when a government is in minority. No sense in whining about it, anyone with half a brain knows that no party wants to be the cause of an election so wait until the next one, vote in a majority and then see what happens.

  • Jeet

    When MacLeans write a story on government in Ottawa shouldn't you add a disclimaer that you are in the pocket of the Lieberals. Honour demands it… Trouble is, to the left, honour is just another four-letter word.

    • gottabesaid

      No, I'm pretty sure Lieberals spell honour with six letters just like Conservatives — although when you go to the U.S., it's only five letters!

      • MostlyCivil

        Sssh…he'll lose his place on the talking points…

    • Thwim

      You may want to look a little closer at the possible implications of an outsider coming into the potash market in a big way.

      In particular, look at what BHP is purchasing down on the coast of California, and think to yourself what they might want with something of that size.

  • JoeC

    I think that Macleans should punk all the partisans by posting false stories in which each party takes a revolving set of positions, changing to the position the other side held and back again over the course of the day , then watch as the partisans hail each new, contrary position as absolutely correct. Or as their heads explode. Either would be funny.

    • Stewart_Smith

      You are too late Joe. The party leaders have already got together and begun that process. (Next week according to the schedule, Giles is going to propose all Canadians be required to pledge their loyalty to the crown… should be fun)

  • SunshineCoaster

    What will change is that Stephen Harper won't be Prime Minister.

  • chet

    Seems Wherry has yet ANOTHER conservative scandal.

    The sky is falling yet again.

    For partisan liberals, the sky is indeed falling, with no chance in the forseeable future that they will retake power.

    I guess its theraputic to have a place where folks can come to convince themselves that power is just around the corner, that all Canadians will be as enraged with Harper as they are here, with virtually every position taken, no matter how reasonable in the circumstances or how mundane.

    Here, let me help:

    You're onto something here. Approving a sale of a Potash company in Saskatchewan is what all right thinking people are most concerned about, and the CPC will dearly pay for…uhm…whatever decision is made about it…and other things of that nature.

    Oh…and Harper ( a democratically elected PM who is in a minority position) is a dictator!!

    • Richard_S_Argent

      Hey Chet! Haven't you extolled the virtues of Chantal Hebert in the past? Called her "the best in the business" or something like that?

      Perhaps you should take a peek at what she has to say today…
      http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/884906…

      • Blue

        …..read the article about unrest among provinces hitting new heights and waited for her to tell us about some of the previous heights reached, you know, for comparison purposes. I remember there was some heights reached under Mulroney, Chretien hit a few heights, and that Trudeau guy was always climbing to new heights.

        So how will we know if Harper is hitting new heights if Chantal has forgot about the old heights.

  • Olivier

    Comment posters on this website put too much stiock into QP. It's just a mockery of everyone who watches.

  • Monica

    The title says it all. It is not so much an indictment of Harper's government as it is about how inept our elected officials are.

  • M_A_D_world

    If people want Potash Corp. to remain in Canadian hands then put in a competing bid. Nationalizing it would effectively kill the goose that lays the eggs anyways. Governments are notoriously bad at managing businesses for profit and shouldn't be anyways.
    As for the government's stance, someone is going to be upset regardless of their course of action. Chose one and accept it.

  • Margaret

    Well that's totally screwed up, but hollinm is well known as a partisan Tory poster, has been around for ages.

    Actually, the Calgary business community is really p*ssed off about this, and there's a major storm brewing for the Tories out here. A leading businessman, in fact I think he's either a prof or the dean of the Calgary Business School, has spoken out very strongly against a potash takeover, pointing out that this is a natural resource, and that (duh) natural resources should remain Canadian-owned.

    That's the reason for Clement/Harper's timidity on all this. I'd love to see Harper ditched in Calgary over it.

  • brooster2

    I predict that, if the government blocks the potash sale and the markets react negatively, Clement will get the blame.

    If, on the other hand, the government greenlights the sale and the people of Saskatchewan react negatively, Clement will get the blame.

    If, on the third hand, the government approves a sale encumbered by conditions and restraints such that no one is happy, Clement will get the blame.

    How can Harper lose? It's a win-win-win for him. Isn't that all his array of sock puppets is good for, after all?

  • Tceh

    Tony seems to revel in the role of sacrificial sockpuppet Clown. I guess if thats all you are good at you gotta run with it.

  • gottabesaid

    Is Clement getting the blame for the census? Nope. Will he get the blame for this (however it shakes down)? Nope. Harper is going to wear this for better or worse.

  • Jan

    I had this cynical thought that if Harper wanted a face saving way to go back to the mandatory long form, he could bounce Clement on the grounds of the census disaster and now the potash deal.

  • Blue

    And I predict that brooster will find a way to blame Clement tomorrow morning when he reaches for the roll of paper and finds it empty.

  • BGLong

    He's neither. He's just the guy who's name is on the business school.

  • Orson Bean

    Yeah, that's it. The entire Calgary business community is in favour of nationalization of all of our natural resources. Just like back in 1980. Who knew?

  • BGLong

    That's why people keep old copies of the National Post around.

  • brooster2

    Funny thing, I was going to blame Clement the last time the roll was empty but my wife owned up. See, unlike the Harper government, we're adults in our household and take responsibility for our transgressions.

  • frobisher

    So, no prorogue necessary. Whew.

From Macleans