Andrew Coyne’s column on reverting to a system of caucus selection of party leaders got a lot of pushback over the Twitter Machine on Saturday, and curiously, those most in favour of retaining our current bastardized system of membership-selection were those who currently or formerly worked in the PMO (as well as a couple of current leadership candidates who don’t currently have seats in the House of Commons, which isn’t surprising seeing as they’d be excluded from such an exercise and well, they have egos to stroke given their current leadership ambitions).
+1. It's for those who miss the days when the country was governed by a bunch of dudes wearing robes at Trinity College. https://t.co/1wOaOijJZt
— Gerald Butts (@gmbutts) April 1, 2017
Hooo, burn. So much more democratic to have the country run by people who went to school together at McGill. https://t.co/UZcCKwSPFj
— Andrew Coyne 🇺🇦🇮🇱🇬🇪🇲🇩 (@acoyne) April 1, 2017
Ok. Seriously then. 105k Canadians from all over the country chose this LPC leader. You would've had her/him chosen by 35 people in Ottawa. https://t.co/xKfrCKCdtH
— Gerald Butts (@gmbutts) April 1, 2017
And now he’s accountable to no one, and the leader’s office has centralized more power, justifying it with “democratic legitimacy.”
Nope. https://t.co/3TL2KRG09v— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) April 1, 2017
Each of whom was elected by tens of thousands. Happy to see the pres of party chosen by party mbrs, but ldr of MPs should be chosen by MPs. https://t.co/2UWs0Daxt2
— Andrew Coyne 🇺🇦🇮🇱🇬🇪🇲🇩 (@acoyne) April 1, 2017
Like most Canadians, I think the PM is leader of the country, not just of MPs. https://t.co/lZ1qIEvUPv
— Gerald Butts (@gmbutts) April 1, 2017
https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/848202229727338498
If you don’t think the party leader should be chosen by “a few people in Ottawa,” presumably it also upsets you that we choose PMs that way.
— Andrew Coyne 🇺🇦🇮🇱🇬🇪🇲🇩 (@acoyne) April 1, 2017
Which is to say, our whole system of government.
— Andrew Coyne 🇺🇦🇮🇱🇬🇪🇲🇩 (@acoyne) April 1, 2017
https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/848203776028811267
See this is where I agree: anything that empowers MPs (<cough> estimates <cough>) is good for our democracy imho.
— Jamie Carroll 🇨🇦🇮🇱🇺🇦 (he/him) (@jec79) April 1, 2017
https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/848226392533860352
And this presidentialization creep is what really gets under my skin, because it’s those who benefit from unearned power – the people in the PMO (less kids in short pants these days than they were under the previous government) who are the most ardent defenders of the system, and using this faux democratic mandate of the 150,000 “supporters” of the party as justification. What none of them bring up is the fact that the PM is unaccountable to those members in any real sense, and certainly unaccountable to the caucus he leads, and that’s a very big problem. And no, a system like that proposed in Democratizing the Constitution of membership selection/caucus removal would never work in practice because unless the method of selection matches the method of removal, there is a legitimacy problem, not to mention this is what happened with both Greg Selinger in Manitoba and Jeremy Corbyn in the UK, and look at where both of them are today. It’s not pretty, and it’s bad for our Westminster system. Caucus selection is really the system we need to revert to if we want accountable leaders and empowered MPs who aren’t being cowed by centralized leaders and their staffers, and we won’t get that now, especially if those staffers are all over the Twitter Machine trying to defend their turf.
If you want to read more about why the way we choose party leaders is damaging our democracy, I wrote a book: https://t.co/WJfx2UZ0U0
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) April 1, 2017
Good reads:
- That filibuster around the committee study on changing the Standing Orders will resume today, in case you were wondering.
- Bombardier’s chairman says he wants his compensation rolled back to 2015 levels after the outcry over it.
- Experts are asking the government to think twice about their “seniors price index” campaign promise. So, another ill-thought promise. Who would have thought?
- The National Defence ombudsman, looking for more independence, is accusing the department of “insidious attacks” against him.
- The NDP have been found to be colluding with “multi-partisan” Fair Vote Canada in the upcoming by-elections, particularly in Ottawa Vanier.
- The Senate Ethics Officer’s ongoing investigation into allegations of harassment in Senator Don Meredith’s office would end if he is expelled.
- Here’s a lengthy look at Bill Blair and his task of making sure legalizing marijuana happens in an orderly fashion.
- Stephen Harper’s former campaign manager thinks that Kevin O’Leary could split the party. As though he were the only one who could…
- Maxime Bernier talked about how corporate welfare was not in line with his values, which explains why he took a stand and left cabinet over it. Oh, wait…
- Jagmeet Singh admits he’s putting together a team for a potential NDP leadership bid.
- Paul Wells writes about yesterday’s Conservative leadership debate, and the exhaustion setting into the race.
Odds and ends:
Here’s a look at the great symbolism of the Senate moving into the oil train station for the duration of Centre Block’s renovations.
Last night were the Juno Awards in Ottawa, and the PM and the GG both made appearances.
https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/848744722873057280
Did the thing where I went to see if they had my book on the shelf. Chapters Rideau is well stocked! #UnbrokenMachine pic.twitter.com/51K7JArn7p
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) April 1, 2017