Roundup: Foolishly demanding Supreme Court intervention

Posted on by

In an attempt to continue to stall having to repay their satellite office expenses, the NDP have taken the incredulous move of demanding that the government refer the matter to the Supreme Court, so that they can decide whether the matter is even justiciable before the NDP’s challenge at the Federal Court goes ahead. Oh, and they’re not going to pay a cent back until they have final say from the courts, and given the pace at which these things happen, it sounds an awful lot like they’re trying to keep putting this off until we’re into the writ period, if not later. More to the point, this is completely crazy and irresponsible because it’s a self-inflected blow to parliamentary sovereignty. Parliament decides its own rules because it’s the body that decides upon the creation of laws in this country, and it has privileges to ensure that it can do so without interference from either the Crown or its agents. What’s worse is how the NDP worded their press release – that they want the Supreme Court “to intervene,” amidst their whinging that this is because the Conservatives and Liberals re being mean to them for partisan reasons – never mind that it was the Clerk who discovered that they broke the rules. The fact that they are wording this in such a way makes it sound like they want the Supreme Court to be the babysitters of Parliament – which is not their job – and furthermore sounds about one step away from them calling on the Queen to intervene for them because they’re not getting their way. It’s political desperation, and it’s a terrible road to start travelling down, to voluntarily start stripping parliament of its privileges because they refuse to own up to their own poor judgement.

https://twitter.com/j_scott_/status/571449661007003649

Good reads:

  • The lack of oversight in C-51 is a recipe for more spy scandals, according to two experts. Meanwhile, thanks to procedural bullying the committee may revert to deciding on the number of meetings if the Speaker rules against them.
  • The national roundtable on missing and murdered Aboriginal women ended in talk of a framework and a commitment to meet next year, but not much else.
  • Justin Trudeau laid out some economic policy planks at a speech in Montreal, making it harder for people to claim that he has no policy.
  • According to Harper, a hijab should be okay in a courtroom. Still no word about getting Chris Alexander to recant his statement that hijabs shouldn’t be worn during citizenship oaths.
  • New rules mean wounded veterans will need to prove they lost limbs every three years instead of every year. Um, guys? Not helping.

Odds and ends:

Andrew MacDougall looks at the cash-for-access scandals happening in the UK, and reminds us that our restricted donation system in Canada is pretty good.

How can you tell an election is coming? The health minister stoked fears of terrorism at a speech on healthcare innovation.

We are weeks away from having three of our four submarines operational for the first time ever.