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

Three rulings in 12 months

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, March 10, 2011 9:01am - 26 Comments

Ned Franks considers yesterday’s two rulings together with last year’s ruling on detainee documents.

Parliamentary procedure expert Ned Franks said no government in Canadian history has been cited so many times for ignoring the rights of Parliament. He offered two possible explanations.”(The rulings) suggest, to put it kindly, that the government is, at a minimum, ignorant of the rules and principles governing parliamentary democracy and, to put it unkindly, that they don’t give a damn and they’ll try to get away with what they can.”

The Globe sees contempt. Steven Chase adds yesterday’s rulings to Peter Milliken’s legacy.

Tags: , , , ,
Bookmark and Share
  • auntie-em-m

    Definitely, let's put it 'unkindly' ;0) I despise my government.

    Sick of their ads ($4,000,000 to be spent advertising the 2011 budget!!?!??) and my taxpaying contribution towards them … intend to claw back every possible penny this year.

  • NorthernPoV

    It is obvious that 25%-30% of voters are so devoted to the Cons that they would continue to vote for them regardless of the overwhelming evidence of their abuse of power in pursuit of a diminished Canada and yet more power.

    Will the 10% "swing" voters finally give up on these miscreants? A responsible, non-partisan media would point the way, demolishing all the silly defenses offered for all the various abuses and highlighting the use of our money to brainwash us.

    • alfanerd

      A responsible, non-partisan media would point the way, demolishing all the silly defenses offered for all the various abuses and highlighting the use of our money to brainwash us.

      It's telling that your view of a non-partisan media is one which actively promotes for/against a political party.

      anyhow, you have the tax payer CBC which is gunning for the Liberals, so stop whining and appreciate that 1 billion is spent every year on propping up the Liberal Communications Department.

    • dave

      25%-30% of voters

      That's within the accepted margin of error for the Crazification Factor, yes.

      • auntie-em-m

        Love that Crazification Factor! Just another rethuglican inclination imported by the CPof Canada (oops,correction, The Harper Government).

  • madeyoulook

    Since these charges against government MPs really only have a chance when there's a minority parliament, I wouldn't want anyone to get too worked up about this. Yeah, I know, it's way too late for that.

    But then, one could easily point out that minority governments should be even more careful to avoid this sort of thing. Such advice has not yet made it through to the CPC caucus, it seems.

    • gottabesaid

      I was going to make this same exact point. Which means great minds think alike or you've found a way to steal people's thoughts.

      • madeyoulook

        Well, I sort of made two points, there. Which one was yours, and can I still keep it?

        • gottabesaid

          Both of 'em actually… though I would have probably been a million times more verbose in trying to get the same ideas across.

      • Thwim

        There's actually two sayings which might apply:

        "Great Minds Think Alike" or "Fools Seldom Differ"

        I won't presume to think which one may be the operating factor here. :)

        • gottabesaid

          I'd go with the second one… but MYL isn't a fool, he's a pirate as far as I can tell.

          • Thwim

            It is an interesting conundrum of our psyches that the greater a mind a person has, the more he thinks he's a fool. The tragedy is, it applies in reverse as well.

    • FVerhoeven

      There are no charges against any MP's. The speaker has merely ruled that the House has priviledges and he has clarified the bounderies of such: if the government decides to not reveal all the information requested by committee, than they must be able to provide valid arguments why such information would not be revealed.

      There are no charges here. The speaker has clarified (once again) the priviledge of the House.

      I think that's a good thing for the well being of our democracy.

      What is bad for the well being of our democracy, is to confuse all of this with MP's being charged. Such explanation would be a distortion of the events unfolding, and would thereby bring further confusion into the public debate,

      • madeyoulook

        Yeah, ok, fine, they are not criminal or judicial charges. But opposition MPs have charged that two government MPs have breached parliamentary privilege. And now a committee will need to study the merits of those charges, complaints, allegations, points, observations, whatever you might prefer to call them.

        I will probably stick with "charges." You may infer a little invisible asterisk each time you see me use the term.

  • CAPS

    Essentially the Government and John Baird's official response amounts to:

    D'uh, winning!

    For some amusement at the expense of an individual suffering a public meltdown (as opposed to a government doin the same), I offer you,

    [youtube 9QS0q3mGPGg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QS0q3mGPGg youtube]

  • WDM

    Does anyone know if there's a list anywhere of all previous breach of privilege rulings? I saw Baird note yesterday that such rulings wouldn't happen in a majority Parlieament. What's the rationale behind that? I know that the end-result – namely a house censure would be extremely unlikely, but to my knowledge any MP can rise on a Question of Privilege and the Speaker can rule.

  • http://twitter.com/TheHarperGov TheHarperGov

    Lookout! Ned Franks doesn't like Us. Earth shattering!

    Oh, and rope-a-dope, baby. Rope-a-dope.

    Return now to your hard-working, law-abiding, CPC-contributing little lives.

    That is all.

  • FVerhoeven

    The Globe sees contempt. Were you surprised, Wherry?

    I am curious: why do we hear so little about the Afghan detainee story, now that all parties have access to the documents?

    Why the rush, the push, the urgency, then the ruling by the speaker, and then nothing but………silence.

    Could it be that the opposition parties have found out that the Harper government had a point, a very valid point indeed, for being carefull not to release all data directly to parliament in that case?

    Just saying.

  • alfanerd

    no, i think its a waste, pointless, and lame.

  • Leo

    Art Eggleton comes to mind.

    In 2002, Mr. Milliken found an apparent case of breach of privilege by former Liberal minister of defence, Art Eggleton, following allegations that he deliberately misled the House when he was asked questions about Afghan detainees. The matter was sent to the Liberal-dominated House Affairs committee, which decided that, while the minister had made a mistake, it was done without any intent to confuse or mislead
    http://www.metohats.info/2011_03/so-there-is-very…

  • Claudia Lemire

    It is lame I don't think pointless, Harper is trying to do what no other government has attempted to do, it might look tacky, inappropriate but it is very gutsy, obviously is not popular and has made MANY, MANY, MANY, mistakes but I think at the end of his term he is going to be a very consequential PM.

  • burlivespipe

    So you're on record of supporting forging documents and taxpayers paying more to political parties (except those parties you don't support)? Wow, how far you've come, baby…

  • alfanerd

    we're talking about the advertising of Canada's Economic Action Plan here, not Harper in general. dont get me wrong, I like Harper, and I hope he stays on for some time, and I agree that he will be very consequential. as for not popular, well not around here, but in the country he's doing quite alright, if polls are to be believed.

  • NorthernPoV

    If you are even partially correct then the compromise process worked…. even though the Cons had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the compromise (standard Con behavior) .

    But as TimesArrow points out, the Bloc is not happy with the process …. and I will add that the NDP never took part.
    So your point doesn't appear to be even partially correct beyond the fact that the Liberals may have been co-opted on this issue.

  • Claudia Lemire

    I have never said that, either way not pro not against it, I have reserved my comment until I know the facts.

    My comment is about the post above:

    Benji1977: Are you ok with the endless advertising….

    Alfanerd: no I think its a waste….

    Hence my reply.

  • Claudia Lemire

    I know you were talking about the advertising, I just happen to think Harper strategy with advertising is brilliant.

    I will get in to it later, I am off to bed now : )

Previous

Next

From Macleans