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

An operational matter

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, March 2, 2011 12:39pm - 44 Comments

In an exchange with reporters yesterday after QP, John Baird explained why he was responding to questions on Bev Oda’s behalf.

Reporter: But is she unhealthy or something now? Is there some reason that she can’t respond to direct questions on her portfolio?

Baird: No, as Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, I have been responding to that issue.

Reporter: Why is that? Isn’t that her purview?

Baird: That’s an operational decision we’ve made.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Bookmark and Share
  • McC_

    as a testament to her courage, no doubt it was the least he could do.

    • tobyornotoby

      If only John Baird would match her courage by also sitting there and shutting up!

  • gottabesaid

    Oh, whatever happened to that good ol' standby 'no comment' when you don't have a good answer to give? I'd rather he avoid the media altogether rather than employ buzzwords and bullsh*t.

    I'm making an operational decision to pound my forehead on my keyboard in frustration.

    • Jenn_

      Just remember to put that answer down the next time someone asks you if you'll vote for the Conservatives.

    • McC_

      unfortunately for you, your operational decision is entirely self-defeating, while Minister Baird's seems to be working out okay for his team.

      • gottabesaid

        You make a good point. Plus my head hurts.

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

    Adds new meaning to 'in theater'

    • OriginalEmily1

      LOL gawd, that's true!

  • burlivespipe

    The glint of her sunglasses says yes.
    Well, now besides the 'how to ruin committee work' and 'how to shut down democracy and make vailed threats against elected officials', apparently the CONs have an operations manual to deal with dumb/disgraced members of the team while protecting all things Harper… If i was a member of the media i'd ask how you could get a subscription to these limited editions… Other than selling out your tub-of-lard soul for a senate seat.

    • Jan

      Chapter 3 – Caucus Spaying and Neutering Program

  • OriginalEmily1

    LOL probably, but it'll take a week to arrive.

  • leroy

    as contrasted to this operational decision (from the HillTimes)

    “The government’s decision to have Mr. Harper and Mr. Baird respond to the controversy contravenes sections of Mr. Harper’s 2008 Accountable Government Guide for Ministers and Ministers of State, which requires daily Question Period attendance with PMO clearance required for any absence and says “ministers are required to answer Parliamentary questions within their areas of authority as clearly and fully as possible.”

    • briguyhfx

      …requires daily Question Period attendance with PMO clearance required for any absence and says “ministers are NOT required to answer Parliamentary questions within their areas of authority as clearly and fully as possible.”

      Fixed for the new reality.

  • BC Blue

    Oda, as all cabinet ministers, should be responding for herself

    • john g

      Agreed. This practice of Ministers hiding behind a designated damage control prime is disgraceful. Didn't like it when the Liberals did it, and really don't like that Harper has gone back on his word to stop this practice.

      • TimesArrow

        You can cite a similar case of a liberal cabinet minister being shielded from accountability can you?

        • john g

          Well sort of. I can cite a Liberal cabinet minister being made Ambassador to Denmark to get him out of the House.

        • McC_

          Best example I can remember is Jane Stewart answering all questions on the HRSDC hullaballo, even though it preceeded her tenure as Minister (IIRC)… contrast, for example, with questions asked of Christian Paradis http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/10/04/ministerial-ac…

          • danby

            But to be fair, that was before the Conservative Accountability Act

  • http://www.jeffbursey.com Jeff Bursey

    To gottabesaid, who pounded his/her head on a keyboard in frustration, and for any others bothered by ministerial silence or inclined to view parliament from a different angle, I'll recommend my satirical book, _Verbatim: A Novel_, published by Enfield & Wizenty, and available in stores and online. It might be cathartic. It also looks at how we govern ourselves.

    Now, before some people think this is an advertisement, I'll add that the way the current parliament is run (and the same for past parliaments) is not just a reflection on the members, but on those who voted them in. In other words, Bev Oda is us; so is every other member, whether or not we like it. They're the voice of our country. What does that say about us? However, the House of Commons is our House, and as with any house, we can make renovations or knock it down, if we choose. Parliament needs to be looked at more critically; it needs to be engaged with on an "operational" level by everyone. It's our right, after all. Going after this or that minister or member doesn't appear to be solving anything.

  • tedbetts

    PLEASE let's not start making jokes or, worse, puns about Conservative caucuses.

  • auntie-em-m

    "Going after this or that minister or member doesn't appear to be solving anything" yet.
    Be gone unreliable members, various ministers and senators!
    I, for one, believe in this kind of incrementalism. ABC

  • TimesArrow

    "To gottabesaid, who pounded his/her head on a keyboard in frustration, and for any others bothered by ministerial silence or inclined to view parliament from a different angle, I'll recommend my satirical book"

    But that's got to hurt at least as much as the keyboard.

    " In other words, Bev Oda is us; so is every other member, whether or not we like it. They're the voice of our country. What does that say about us"

    Sorry but i expect a higher standard of ethical behaviour than us.

    • http://www.jeffbursey.com Jeff Bursey

      Don't be sorry, TimesArrow. Higher standards need to be expected everywhere, even if they can't be reached.

      • TimesArrow

        I'll keep an eye out for your book. :)

        • http://www.jeffbursey.com Jeff Bursey

          Thanks, TimesArrow. Let me know what you think.

    • Healthcare Insider

      I am with youTimesArrow. I too believe that we need to expect a higher ethical behavior of our elected officials. I will take that you mean that you agree with me that Liberal MLA Pablo Rodriquez should be asked to resign if he is found guilty of drunk driving/failure to blow?

  • McC_

    and (unfortunately?) with caucuses, in the end, size always counts more than how they're used.

  • danby

    Hiding behind John Baird is bullsh!t. I bet even Bev Oda feels that way.
    Where is her integrity? Where is her self respect?
    Will no one stand up to Stephen Harper?

    • Mike T.

      Know what would be an interesting list? Get a group of headhunters together and have them make a list of MPs who would be likely to find a six figure job within two months of leaving their job as an MP.

      [Interestingly enough, I'm not sure Harper makes the list...]

      • McC_

        now, now, he'll do just fine.

        (e.g., if Mike Harris could find good-paying work…)

    • TimesArrow

      "Will no one stand up to Stephen Harper?"

      We've has strong and at times autocratic leaders in the past: notably Trudeau, Mulroney and Chretien. But i don't believe any of those guys on even their worst day would have attempted the kind of bs SH has. What's more they all had strong ministers in their respective cabinets who wouldn't have stood for it either.

      • E_B_

        To some extent, Gordon Chong did.

        And, I know he won't win any popularity contests, Garth Turner most certainly did.

        • burlivespipe

          I believe it's Michael, but the fact that he's an invisible person to almost everyone would accentuate the solution to your problem… Stalin would be proud.

          • E_B_

            My bad… Indeed. I meant Michael Chong.

  • NorthernPoV

    Given the contextual spin:
    "Just an administrative dispute over obscure accounting rules"
    then
    "operational decision"
    is at least consistent.

    Harper and his thugs are consistently breaking all the norms of responsible government and all of their original promises.

  • MostlyCivil

    "That’s an operational decision we’ve made."

    Wonder how she feels, not being part of the "we've"?

  • McC_

    all the more reason for her to have come clean from the get go. if she was so concerned that pay more attention to more important matters, she could have set the record straight immediately after her committee appearance (a simple letter to the Committee's Clerk and Chair, copying the other members would have sufficed) we could have all moved on.

  • M_A_D_world

    Why on earth would anyone ever aspire to become a Minister of this government?
    The name calling, bullying, and generally being treated like crap on a daily bases. From you're own government no less, let alone the typical slagging and mud slinging from across the floor.
    The Prime Minister has created an environment from outward appearances that isn't conductive to attracting the talent that is needed for good government.

    • Anon

      "Why on earth would anyone ever aspire to become a Minister of this government? "

      I imagine few people capable of the job do. And that probably explains the calibre of current cabinet members.

    • McC_

      doesn't matter what party you're in, the car and driver, lots of travel, pretty good pay, being the boss of an org with up to a few thousand employees who will all do pretty much whatever you or the 22 year old stormtrooper in your office ask for, did I mention lots of travel? Most people at home or abroad are pretty darn impressed and gracious to receive you when you show up for a meeting, pie cutting ceremony or international negotiation, the boards of directorships after retirement… even with the drags like your chief of staff appointed by and accountable only to the PMO, having to clear every syllable of planned public speech by the centre in advance, and generally knowing that at any moment you could be thrown under the bus to protect the Big Guy, being a Minister is a pretty good gig. (again, doesn't matter what party you're in)

  • Healthcare Insider

    When is Peter Milliken going to make a decision?

  • McC_

    policy isn't law, it's guidelines, principles, frameworks… open at the edges when required.

  • wsam

    Okay. I get it. It’s an operational decision for Bev Odious not to answer questions. Well, that clears everything up. Now can everyone just leave the Conservatives alone and get back to chattering about how Iggy sucks.

Previous

Next

From Macleans