Roundup: Another day talking in circles

Posted on by

We’re in for yet another round of wailing and gnashing of teeth on the subject of the electoral reform process, and this time it’s from the NDP who are moving a supply day motion to try and get the proposed parliamentary committee to reflect their particular gamed composition rather than a composition that reflects the House of Commons – which, I will remind you, was elected entirely fairly and correctly under how our system is supposed to operate, where we elect individual seats in separate and simultaneous elections. Demands that the committee should reflect the popular vote ignore the facts that a) the popular vote is a logical fallacy that does not actually exist since there were 338 separate elections and not just one, and b) the composition that the NDP are demanding is not actually proportional to the “popular vote,” as they are giving the Bloc and the Green Party an oversized share of the seats and votes. And rather than just thirty minutes of this endless repetition as we might hear in QP, no, it will be the whole day in the Commons, minus one hour for private members’ business. And we’ll be subjected to the sanctimonious speeches of the NDP (of which they will read the same speech in English and French ad nauseum, only changing the riding names mentioned), followed by baying from the Conservatives that what we really need is a referendum, and the odd interjection from Elizabeth May that she deserves a vote on the committee and that no, we don’t need a referendum because it’s not a constitutional issue (except that certain kinds of electoral reform are actually constitutional issues, albeit likely with the simplest amending formula). And then there are the Liberals, where we’ll get some of the usual saccharine from Maryam Monsef, some sharper rebukes from Mark Holland, and the odd backbencher repeating the talking points about Canadians demanding a change to the system. There won’t be any substantive issues discussed, and while I will be the first to say that yes, process is important, so long as each side tries to game the process to fit their own purposes, we’ll just keep talking in circles and go nowhere. Which, really, is where this discussion should go and we should instead invest in a programme of civic literacy instead so that people can actually learn how the system works. But in the absence of that, I’m ready to declare that we should nuke the whole thing from orbit.

Good reads:

  • Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott were grilled for hours in the Senate over C-14, giving the response that the bill strikes a reasonable balance. The ministers keep insisting they are “open to amendments” despite all evidence to the contrary.
  • Justin Trudeau told his caucus not to put any stock into rumours that any incident led to Hunter Tootoo’s resignation before seeking treatment for addiction.
  • Trudeau said that there was no need for a public inquiry into why rogue RCMP officers had conducted illegal surveillance on two journalists.
  • Mauril Bélanger’s bill on the national anthem passed Second Reading and now goes to the Heritage Committee for study.
  • The Privacy Commissioner is concerned the Information Commissioner will have too much power to release personal information with proposed new powers.
  • Senator Murray Sinclair talks about the first anniversary of the Truth and Reconciliation Report and its recommendations.
  • Senator Betty Unger talks about her opposition to Bill C-14 (but she seems to be believing a lot of paranoia on top of her religious objections).
  • In what I suspect was a bit of mischief-making, Erin O’Toole praised Kevin Vickers’ actions in Dublin and wanted all MPs to congratulate him for it.
  • Nathan Cullen says he’s consulting with “party elders” about is potential NDP leadership bid.

Odds and ends:

The Chinese foreign minister chastised a journalist for asking about a human rights situation in that country.

Justin Trudeau raised a pride flag on Parliament Hill for the first time in the nation’s history.

Two of the oldest living former Press Gallery members visited the Hill yesterday for the launch of the Gallery’s 150th anniversary book.

2 thoughts on “Roundup: Another day talking in circles”

  1. Just to observe that the term “one-year anniversary” is redundant. First anniversary would be correct.

Comments are closed.