Sunday, July 06, 2008


Sorry. I had to write the title that way because that is how this man speaks.

The Ethics Committee is scheduled to hear from Elections Canada on July 15th. Dominic LeBlanc
is concerned that Harper may prorogue the government before the committee has a chance to sit.

Is his suspicion founded? Well if you've watched the filibustering that the Conservatives have mounted for months on this issue, I'd say that his concern is well founded.

The Con point man on the issue is the ever petulant, Pierre Poilievre. He hasn't heard that the government would prorogue, (um something tells me he's not in the inner circle these days) and what a surprise, he would just relish the chance to take that bias Elections Canada to task!

"Elections Canada has a lot of explaining to do," he said in an interview. "They changed the rules after the game was over, and they singled out Conservatives for a practice that all parties follow."

Poilievre said he wants to ask Mayrand about "hundreds" of examples of opposition parties making similar transfers that never raised an eyebrow at Elections Canada.

Can't you just hear his stilted emphasis on "hundreds"?

I have absolutely no doubt that Poilievre is chomping at the bit to eviscerate Elections Canada. That's the entire focus of this government. To reduce the credibility of proud institutions and boards in this country is their main concern.

They are doing it by stealth and through propaganda. Yep, I used the terrible P word, but it's apt in this case. For instance, don't kid yourself about the Morgentaler debate. It's more about debasing the appointment committee, it's members and the relevance of this tradition, than it is about abortion rights, though many of their MPs and followers may not realise that.

Back to the issue though, will they or won't they? My sense is that they will and they are prepared to take the hit on what that will signal believing Canadians aren't paying attention. They may be right, but the Lib's could use that as the icing on the unaccountability cake.

As much as Con's like Poilievre, would love nothing better than to attack Chief electoral officer Marc Mayrand, they are on the wrong side of this issue from what I've read. Their argument in public may sound compelling, but it is far from factual, which is puzzling to me. How do they expect to make their case in court based on non-fact? It's one thing to "dupe the people" but to actually sue, go to court and hope to dupe the justice system is something else.

Do you think they weigh their odds? Do you think they believe if they lose, they can shout to the country even louder that our systems are 'against' them? 'The judiciary is bias, activist, blah, blah, blah?' Or do you think that if they win, they will lay claim to their bogus purer than un-driven snow accountability ruse? Cover of course for installing a completely bias system of justice...a Conservative one.

I know where I fall, but I'd love to hear what you think.


Red Canuck said...

The Cons would have no qualms about a prorogue. As you said, they have done pretty much everything else in their power to divert, distract and obfuscate. In fact, I'd wager LeBlanc's public 'speculation' is actually a well calculated political move. By publicly raising the idea that the Cons would prorogue merely to dodge committee business, he hopes to shame the Conservatives into not proroguing. If the Cons prorogue now, it will look like a confirmation of the Liberal theory. The only problem: how does one shame the shameless?

Anonymous said...

That is not the only item that wlll die if they proogue. What ever happened to the public hearing on Mulroney, the committee looking into the Bernier fiasco?

Anonymous said...

Actually the biggest danger the Conservatives face is that by prorgueing again this would be three throne speechs in three years. Most governments have only one or two throne speeches in 4 years. Because so much of their real agenda is hidden the cons are having real difficulties putting up legislation that they then compound by cutting debate short to force a quick vote that is declared an election issue to try and force one.

The opposition parties should have a good time pointing out that the cons. are afraid of being called out on scandles or lack any focus on all the major issues facing us and shouldn't be leading if they have no positions. The alternative is for parliament to resume on time and a race to a fall election. Either way the cons. lose.

William Dahl
from Garths blog

knb said...

RC, The only problem: how does one shame the shameless?

LOL, great point.

Indeed that is what I'm trying to say, but so are they of course without telling us.

Looking mean and attacking all the time hasn't worked, but they seem to stick to that strategy.

But wait, they have Giorno now. He of the Common Sense Revolution!

For all the banter, this is a smart guy and I sincerely doubt that he'll employ dated, hated, tactics.

ottlib said...

The question is can Mr. Giorno temper Mr. Harper.

Mr. Harper has been the main mover of the current Conservative strategy not his staff. I believe that Mr. Harper has a very inflated opinion of his political acumen so he may not be open to a change in strategy suggested by someone who has not worked for him before.

So I really wonder how much influence Mr. Giorno will have on the "chess master".

knb said...

Anon @ 8:13 That is not the only item that wlll die if they proogue. What ever happened to the public hearing on Mulroney, the committee looking into the Bernier fiasco?

Indeed. Other Bills, like C-20, reforming, (cough), the Senate.

I'm quite certain they would once again like to have a clean slate.

wilson said...

Assuming Dion is going to bring down the government at the earliest possible time (surely he can't do that hand sitting thing for another session)
a Speech from the Throne is the fastest way to that end.
The economy, healthcare and environment are top of the mind, don't think too many Canadians are interestedmuch in committees.
Tho Liberals would surely like to do a little more smearing before the election.
I don't think you'll get the chance. Cons should prorogue for an election early into the session.

Loraine Lamontagne said...

Wilson, if memory serves, and as Harper declared that every vote on government bills are vote of confidence, there seems to be a whole lot of opportunities for Dion, Duceppe and Layton.

RuralSandi said...

I have to wonder if they porogue "again" if Joe Public will get angry - as one friend of my husband said - it's like playing hooky from school at taxpayer expense.

If they want to "get the job done" it would be nice if they actually worked full time like everyone else.

RuralSandi said...

About "lies" - read Darryl Raymaker's blog about the lies told by MSM

Then, read Far and Wide about lies by Baird.


Green supporter said...

Ruralsandi: who was playing hooky everytime there was a vote in the last couple of sessions of Parliament? The most important act a parliementarian does is to vote on laws, either by passing of opposing them. The Liberals have lost ANY AND ALL moral high ground to even comment on the Conservatives propoguing Parliament.

ottlib said...

No greem supporter the primary function of Parliamentarians is to consider the pros and cons of proposed legislation, propose amendments and otherwise debate legislation with the goal of making it better. Voting comes at the end and is generally anti-climatic.

That never happened in this Parliament because the Harper government used legislation as a weapon against the Liberals.

They disrupted committees, made procedural votes on reporting from the committees, they allowed to function, confidence matters, and generally made virtually every other vote an attempt to trigger an election. And the whole time they were aided and abetted by Mr. Harper's best friend in Parliament, Mr. Layton. The Liberals were having none of it.

You can fault the Liberals all you want for doing so but no party in this Parliament, with, surprisingly, the exception of the Bloc, has treated the institution of Parliament with any respect since January 2006.

So green supporter, unless you are willing to take one of the other two who are responsible for the current travesty on The Hill to task you are nothing more than a partisan hack whose opinion is not worth a bucket of yellow snow.

Green supporter said...

Ottlib - Our carbon tax is more effective than the Liberal's plan. Once in power the Liberals tend to abandon their election playbook, does anyone remember the Redbook promises? I'm also happy that the Liberals will have to abandon their "Green Shift" slogan. It is misleading to the public in that it steals the Green party's name, although it took a provide lawsuit from a company to set them straight.

The thing that puzzles me is why May is tarnishing our brand by backing Dion. His party will never let him implement a serious environmental plan - the corporate Canadian establishment which controls the Liberals will never allow it.