Roundup: Mulcair’s Senate delusions

Posted on by

It was Thomas Mulcair’s turn to talk to Peter Mansbridge, and it was a bit of a doozy. Not only because he too insisted that whoever wins the most seats should form government (with a bunch of “it’s a really complex constitutional question but…” thrown in), but rather because of his continued wilful ignorance about how he proposes to deal with the Senate. It’s not just about his fantasy notion that Senate abolition could ever happen (which it won’t), or that he’ll somehow be able to sit down with the premiers and make it happen right away (even if he brings the federal cheque book to the table, it’s still not going to happen). No, it’s his attitude for how he would deal with it should he form government. Not only are vacancies mounting, but he told Mansbridge that he wouldn’t even appoint a Government Leader in the Senate. This is actually a Very Big Deal. Why? Because if legislation is to pass the Senate, it needs to happen according to proper procedure, and proper procedure requires a government voice – particularly one from cabinet – to be in the Chamber to shepherd government bills through, an to answer questions on behalf of the government in Senate Question Period. Now, Harper has already been petulant about this when he refused to make his current Senate leader a member of cabinet (even though he still gets PCO support, and as we’ve learned, PMO handlers to deal with messaging), but there is still a government leader in there to do the things that he’s supposed to do. If Mulcair would be so completely cavalier as to further break an already damaged institution by refusing to let it do its job properly under the pretext of daring them to vote down bills passed by the Commons, it’s unconscionable. We have someone campaigning to be the leader of the country on a platform of thumbing his nose at the constitution, whether that’s around a refusal to make appointments, or in ensuring that it can do its job. And this is more than a question of “democratic expression” of a government that has won an election, as Mulcair phrases his bullying tactics – it’s about process. And what is democracy? Democracy IS process. Process matters, just like the constitution. Why are we giving him a free pass when he seems to be of the notion that the constitution and the institutions of parliament don’t matter?

On the campaign:

  • Stephen Harper promised cuts to EI premiums.
  • Thomas Mulcair promised more help for the auto sector.
  • Justin Trudeau promised more spending for housing as part of his infrastructure dollars (along with a ridiculous promise about RSP rules for down payments).
  • Elizabeth May unveiled the “fully costed” Green platform, which promises big spending but the revenue figures seem a bit suspect.

Good reads:

  • In the rest of his interview with Mansbridge, Mulcair talks about pulling out of the mission in Iraq, the Clarity Act, and his other election promises.
  • The Conservatives and the NDP tried to make hay of the fact that Trudeau correctly pointed out that wealthy people self-incorporate to pay less tax.
  • Ashley Csanady gives a great explainer of how governments are formed.
  • Scott Gilmore lays out how we can accept 200,000 Syrian refugees within the next year. Meanwhile, there are a mere 9 families in the queue for private sponsorship.
  • Security experts note that the spectre of terrorists coming over with Syrian refugees is being overblown.
  • Andrew Coyne offers a damning assessment of the lifeless, ideologically bankrupt Conservative campaign.
  • Paul Wells, conversely, hypothesizes why Harper is so chipper when his campaign appears to be heading for a crash.

Odds and ends:

What? MPs get severance pay? OH NOES! How terrible that people who made sacrifices for public service can get some remuneration!

AFN National Chief Perry Bellegarde says he will vote in the election after all.

And here’s a look at the Queen’s historic day, marking the longest reign.

2 thoughts on “Roundup: Mulcair’s Senate delusions”

  1. Dale,

    Should Justin Trudeau lead the next government, would he not find himself in the same dilemma as Mulcair, given that Justin tossed all the Liberal senators from caucus and presumably, then, wouldn’t have a Government Leader in the Senate?

    • It’s less of a challenge for him as he can still name a Speaker and Government Leader, though he may have to bring one into caucus/cabinet. He hasn’t refused to, which is the important distinction.

Comments are closed.