Thursday, June 14, 2007

Standing Committee on the Environment, Falls Down

Bob Mills, the chair of the committee has just stepped down and the committee is adjourned. Why? Well it's a long story, 2 hours long in fact, but here are the highlights.

While doing other work this morning, I tuned into listen to the hearings, as I'd read they were going to discuss what happened at the G8 meeting.

As the meeting opened, David McGuinty put forward a motion, stating that the chair had re-written the agenda, without consulting the committee and that contravened the motion they had previously passed (vote 10-0) to hear witnesses on the substance and impact of the G8 declaration.

I know, yawn, but hear me out. The motion asked that the agenda be reinstated and that the chair, Bob Mills apologise. McGuinty clarified that it was not a confidence motion, simply an acknowledgement that the chair had erred and that in the future, such unilateral decisions would not be taken.

Well, all hell broke loose, with the opposition supporting the motion and of course the government not. 2 FULL hours of idiotic rhetoric flinging then ensued, with the government side, dragging this out in every conceivable way.

I now have heard for myself how their "manual to disrupt" works.

For the first 90 minutes, they had witnesses sitting at the table listening to this, for the remaining 30, they had gone to the trouble of hooking up with 2 other witnesses by phone, only to finally vote on the motion, it passed and Mills stepped down.

Witnesses who had been holding on the phone were unceremoniously dismissed. The con's in a snit, would not appoint another chair, so "meeting adjourned". Even when opposition members put forward conservative names, they each declined. I have heard 6 year old's argue in a more intelligent fashion. What a bloody embarrassment.

So my friends, how serious is the government about the environment? Tough to say, given we now have no committee to ask.
UPDATE - Apparently the party whips have met and the committee will re-convene on Tuesday with a motion to reinstate Mills. Jay Hill say's that Mills did not resign. I heard him say, "well, I guess I'm done". Sounds like a resignation to me.
UPDATE 2 - Hmmm. It seems the HoC visited my site after this post. I wonder if it was the good guy's or the bad guy's?

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

So you were watching this committee eh? Checked CPAC's schedule and it wasn't on the main network.

Do you work at Parliament Hill and have access to the live committees, or do Liberal staffers just send you this crap to blog about?

knb said...

Anon, perhaps you should brush up on your reading skills. I did not say I watched, I said I listened.

How? Via the Parliament's website.

I'm afraid your juvenile attempt at "gotcha", failed.

MrvnMouse said...

This is incredible. The guy should have stepped down right from the get-go and at very least saved everyone the time and effort.

Bugger these Cons are a huge waste of government resources.

knb said...

. The guy should have stepped down right from the get-go

What?!, and deny all his fellow con's the melodrama?
Couldn't do that.

To be honest, I thought he had been doing okay as chair up until now.

Gayle said...

It sure looks like Harper's crew is "getting things done" for us.

What amazes me is that after the release of the disruption manual, and all the press that got, they still follow it.

ottlib said...

knb:

Jealousy, bloody mindedness and just plain stupidy.

That has been the main features of the Conservative government and it manifests itself well in committees.

The jealousy comes from them watching Jean Chretien have his way for more that a decade and they want that for themselves.

Stupidity is from their inability to learn patience so that they can do things to earn a majority, which would allow them to get their way like Mr. Chretien. They have been so horny to act like they have a majority they started doing so from the beginning and they have only reduced their chances of getting the real thing to almost nil.

Bloody-minded because they do not seem to have the willingness or the ability to change tack. They are bulling ahead with a failed strategy even though there is mounting evidence that it is hurting them.

Then again that last point could also be related to their stupidity.

Whatever, but I am actually beginning to enjoy this. It is beginning to look like the Conservatives are on the path of self-destruction. There is still alot of politics to go so things could change but they are beginning to look very vulnerable.

knb said...

What amazes me is that after the release of the disruption manual, and all the press that got, they still follow it.

Isn't that hysterical? It certainly indicates that they really believe their tactic will work.

Busted!...again.

Steve V said...

"It is beginning to look like the Conservatives are on the path of self-destruction. There is still alot of politics to go so things could change but they are beginning to look very vulnerable."

Maybe the best advice for the Liberals, stay out of the way. I honestly don't think these people get it, and while they continue to act recklessly, the negative impressions are cementing themselves.

I've said this before, I believe the spring of 2007 will be seen as the high water mark for the Harper government.

knb said...

ottlib and Steve, I agree with you both.

I, like you ottlib, am realising that some of this stuff makes me happy. I'm trying to keep it check though, because I think Steve is right.

They are eating their own at the moment and I think it best to gather the spent arrows for our quiver.

Steve V said...

"I think it best to gather the spent arrows for our quiver.'

Nice.

Anonymous said...

When I look back, seems Chretien was right. During the leadership race - the convention, Chretien was interviewed on various stations. I don't remember who was interviewing him at the time, but when asked about Dion as a leader he did say that it would be Harper who would self-destruct (not the exact words) - it was just a matter of time.

By the way, about the "Steve" thing, I read on The Harper Index that in 1988 when Harper ran in Calgary for the Reform Party his name on the ballot was "Steve Harper". Just a little tidbit - so we can call him Steve.

knb said...

I don't recall hearing Chretien saying that, interesting.

I think "Lil Stevie", better describes his petulant attitude, :).