To be honest, I've been a little annoyed at how the Speaker has allowed a number of government MP's to continue their practice of reciting childish statements, slagging Michael Ignatieff just before QP. I think the Conservatives thought that they were clever by not identifying who they were speaking of until the end of their statement, but a grade one class could pick up on where they were going. In fact, I sometimes think that is who their real audience is.
Today, it went a bit farther in that it wasn't only the Conservatives who did this, but a Bloc member joined in and wasn't that exactly the point that the Speaker made when he ruled these statements as out of bounds? He claimed that it would lead to more and more members engaging in overtly partisan insults, when the target had no way to respond.
Today, Speaker Milliken appeared to have had enough. Bravo and it's about time.
The Conservatives have fought this ruling tooth and nail. What do you suppose the chances are that Daryl Kramp will try his hand at this tomorrow?
17 comments:
Boy, they sure must be worried. I watched what goes on behind the person answering a question and/or making personal attacks.
The two school boys - Del Mastro and Dykstra chatting and yukking up through nearly all of Statement of Members and QP. Baird was playing on his blackberry.
This is taxpayer paid time and kiddies get to play and yuk it up. You know, they work so hard for Canadians.
Oh, we mustn't forget the never ending nod, nods and standing ovations.
Hmmmm - would be tempting to write a letter to the editor in Kramps riding complaining that he's using taxpayer funded time to play partisan childish games instead of caring or acknowledging good deeds and such of his constituents.
I'll be really interested to see what happens tomorrow Sandi.
Harper is away, so who will be giving the pep talk? His go-to guy, Poilievre? We know where that will lead.
When is Milliken ever going to rule on the possession of stolen property malfeasance perpetrated by Mark Holland and Marlene Jennings?
''Commons Speaker Peter Milliken has threatened to suspend a Conservative MP if he continues making
personal attacks
against Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff.
Daryl Kramp received the warning after
accusing Ignatieff of hypocrisy
on a number of issues.''
So now, when the Liberals (Opps) personally attack an MP of the government, accusing them of hypocrisy,
they will be suspended?
Maybe that is why the Cons forced the Speaker into finally standing up to the House decorum ruling .
Down the road, the Opps better be civil too.
also, MI is the INTERM Leader, not the Leader of the OffOpp
The Speaker was correct to admonish Kramp. His behaviour was disgraceful.
LOL, I see my eviltwin Twit is here within 3 minutes of my posting.
I will have to check out your regulars KNB!
Hmm. Two wilsons!
To the real one, the opposition is entitled to call hypocrisy when they see it and they do so often in QP. Even in members statements, they can speak to policy etc in the context of what they are addressing. It's personal slags, all of which are lies btw, that the House has been warned of.
For the record wilson, it's interim, not interm. Even if you mean that as an insult, it makes no sense.
Yah, we have a Twit (troll with identity trouble) on BTs,
but only impersonates the women and with the exception of Chuckers blog, only attacks women's blogs.
And here he is, a women's blog, Twitting.
Creepy eh, Knb..
I'm sure the Speaker properly calls MI the Interim (thx for the sp.ck) Leader. The reporters never get it right, just saying.
'the opposition is entitled to call hypocrisy when they see'
but MPs on the government side are booted out for doing the same?
That's like our Western CWB,
Goodale sent 6 farmers to jail for doing the same thing, selling their own grain, yet Eastern farmers sell their grain freely...
wilson, you're comparing apples and cow patties.
The opposition is there to call the government to account and the government has an opportunity to respond. Even then, they respond with lies and seem to think they can ask questions of the opposition. Sorry. That's not how our system works.
Don't make me go back and pull Harper quotes from when he was in opposition.
Members statements are not a free for all and the Speakers ruling was well founded. If Kramp tries again tomorrow, yes, he should be suspended, but personally I hope it's petulant Pete who does the deed. He'll be all over the air waves and that never ends well.
Wilson (the First): Kramp, Pollievre, et al, are lowering the level of decorum in the House with the false allegations and personal attacks. See, it never surprises me how this works. When we attack the government (or Opposition - when the Cons were in Opp) on their policy (a justified attack), there's all sorts of crying out about "attack politics", yet when their own crowd is going beyond policy, or MP actions, and making the attacks personal, all of a sudden it's not an issue?
Glad you agree that Kramp's words were unjustified. PP has a lot of hot air escaping his oral perforation too...
Oh, I agree that the attacking has to stop, both sides of the House.
I don't like it when the government does it either.
Perhaps if the Opps didn't preface every question with an accusation of incompetency or misleading Canadians, the answers would be more civil, maybe...they should try it?
And both sides invent '15 second clip quotes', which, without context do not resemble the truth.
Just for the camera/reporters, get that zinger in!
Maybe what we need is to get rid of parliamentary priviledge, some forced civility.
(Past) time for parliamentary reform.
1) eliminate member's statements
2) pull the plug on the TV broadcast for QP
3) abolish those inane same party questions
..just for starters
Hmmm. Members statements can serve a noble purpose so I wouldn't eliminate them, just control them on all sides.
Unplug the TV? Well, there is some merit to that suggestion, but there is too little exposure of this government as it is, so I wouldn't vote yea on that. In fact, it's expected that there will be some theatre in QP and I'm fine with that. It's the nasty stuff I can't stand. I'd love to see some wit weave it's way into the chamber.
The inane same party questions? I'm with you on that. I don't care who is in power, those are self serving ridiculous time wasters. If you can't get your message out in other ways, there is a problem. I confess I don't know their origin though.
Maybe we need less QP,
only 2 days a week.
Wilson, if they acted like adults and quit wasting our taxpayer paid time, there wouldn't have to be maybe we should do this or maybe they should do that.
And, this Johnnie hit me first stuff never worked on my mother and it shouldn't work on supposedly adult MP's with some sort of statesmanship and polish. So, cut out the dig back to the past crap - after 3 plus years the blaming everyone else just doesn't cut it - way, way past its due date.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the issue the fact that MP's are using Members statements for these attacks? I believe that is why the Speaker is stepping in - because that is not what Members' Statements are for.
QP - is for the opposition to ask the government questions. Totally different kettle of fish. When Harper and his boys go back to the opposition where they belong, they can ask all the stupid questions they want.
There is only one way Gayle,
that Interim leader of the official opposition is going to become PM, next election.
No way even the magnificent Ignatieff can DOUBLE , 200% , their current seats.
Only by joining with the Dippers will MI become PM,
next election,
IF Liberal and Dippers combined out number the Cons, MI WILL seize the government.
In 2 elections, maybe MI could go alone, but not next one.
If MI does a coalition (or what ever name he gives the power grab) with Dippers,
there is no turning back,
he will have to unite the left,
OR walk away from a party left in ashes.
The outcome (popularity) of a coalition of Libs and Socialitsts is the great unknown.
Post a Comment