Clever timing -- the Sunday before a holiday for many Canadians:

David Akin , Canwest News Service
Sunday, May 23, 2010

OTTAWA -- The federal government has ordered that Conservative political aides refuse to testify at House of Commons committees, a decree that sets Stephen Harper's Conservatives on another collision course with Parliament.
17 comments:
If the Conservative aides will not testify in front of House committees, why should any other Canadian?
I strongly encourage the opposition to show its spine by using all the powers it can to force any citizen and inhabitant of Canada to testify. If that means seeking jail for contempt of Parliament, so be it. I hope someone will be able to clarify who could impose a punishment: Parliament, the House of Commons, a committee, or a court.
Politically by appearing weak on the committee issue, the opposition lets Harper consolidate his control over Parliament and gain supporters who want strong action.
On the issue of the auditor-general seeking access to the MPs' expense accounts, Harper's Conservatives have little to lose as their supporters don't seem to care about the fine details of Canada's democracy. The Liberals and NDP have more to lose. If these two parties don't care about being publicly accountable for their MPs' financial expenses, then their lukewarm supporters may go elsewhere such as to the Conservatives, Greens or Bloc in Quebec.
It is getting increasingly difficult to care about this stuff when the worse Harper gets the more he seems to go up in the polls. Of course, I know it is not actually true because his support is actually as lower now then it was at the time of the last election. However, in the absence of an opposition it seems like we are getting nowhere fast.
When the opposition is as weak as it is presently is, Harper can get away with anything.
How sad is that?
I strongly encourage the opposition to show its spine by using all the powers it can to force any citizen and inhabitant of Canada to testify. If that means seeking jail for contempt of Parliament, so be it
Wouldn't that be illegal? Parliamentarians have no special power over ordinary citizens that I'm aware of.
It wasn't that long ago that the Opps demanded Helena take responsibility for her staffers sending anon letters to the media,
what's changed?
The Opps want to hold Minister's responsible for what happens on the battlefields in Afghanistan,
isn't that Ministerial Responsibility?
Opps are always hunting for the head of a Conservative Minister,
what's changed?
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/Infoparl/english/issue.asp?param=188&art=1270
in case power doesn't work.
Thanks for that link thawp. I think that Harper is just using this as a stalling tactic.
One only has to watch the proceedings of any of these committee's to understand the disdain the government has for them.....at times they're even worse than question period in the House.
Maybe if the opposition committee members would act like adults the work of government committee's might even end up being to the benefit of Canadians????????????????
remind me again which party it was that liked to complain about the libs and demanded more accountability and transperancy in govt? Right, the Tories
SD: To my knowledge, contempt would have to be voted on by the House.
Wilson: Let's talk hypocrisy. Libs also asked for Raitt's resignation over the "tape", yet the PM did squat and Raitt threw her assistant under the bus.
Ultimately, MPs are responsible for the actions of their staff but staffers are responsible for their own actions and as per the Speaker's ruling, must be made available to speak at committee, if requested.
For the government to come out with this "policy", proves once again, that there is no transparency, accountability.
Anon(12:14): Let's talk about the Con manual that encouraged committee members to disrupt, delay, etc. meetings? Someday, that manual will become publicly available and it will make for interesting reading.
Let's talk about the Con manual that encouraged committee members to disrupt, delay, etc. meetings? Someday, that manual will become publicly available and it will make for interesting reading.
Perhaps. But it won't reveal anything that the Liberals and NDP don't already know and haven't already used themselves, will it? They just never got caught with a hard copy...
Fred: Always blaming the "other guys". The same was said about the In/Out scandal.
Next excuse?
Big Winnie said...
Fred: Always blaming the "other guys".
Big Winnie: always forgetting the old parable dealing with glass houses and stones...
The same was said about the In/Out scandal.
Which not only was not a scandal, the conservatives WON the court case over it (where were you?).
Next excuse?
Next foot in mouth?
Fred: The In/Out scandal court case is not over...Where have you been?
Big Winnie said...
Fred: The In/Out scandal court case is not over...Where have you been?
It's all over but the crying. The Conservatives will win these appeals the same way they won the original case (the outcome of which was never in doubt, frankly); it's an inconvenience, nothing more.
And while I have your attention:
-------------------
Let's talk about the Con manual that encouraged committee members to disrupt, delay, etc. meetings? Someday, that manual will become publicly available and it will make for interesting reading.
Perhaps. But it won't reveal anything that the Liberals and NDP don't already know and haven't already used themselves, will it? They just never got caught with a hard copy...
-------------------
Your surrender is noted (even if I had to drag it out of you)...
@Fred:
Your surrender is noted (even if I had to drag it out of you)...
NOT EVEN CLOSE
Again and if I didn't say so before, Accountability and Transparency..
Where is Soudas?
Big Winnie said...
@Fred:
Your surrender is noted (even if I had to drag it out of you)...
NOT EVEN CLOSE
Yeah, yeah...tell yourself whatever you need to...but in the future, take some common-sense advice: when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
(you're welcome...;)
Where is Soudas?
Right out in plain sight where he always was. He even appeared on Power Play, right in the foyer of the HOC, laughing about the whole thing. Oh, and in case you missed it (as you seem to miss so many other things): he's NOT going to be appearing before the committee, as was his position all along. The committee itself backed down, as we all knew they would, because their position is legally and constitutionally shaky, and they know it. We win, you lose. AGAIN.
Post a Comment