The Star has a story that shows how a recently appointed judge made donations to the Liberal Party in the past couple of years – $1800 worth over the two fiscal years, in part by attending a fundraising dinner. And after it lays out all of his donations, the story leaves us with this: “It is not unusual for judicial appointees to have made political donations, nor does it break any rules.” Which makes me wonder why they’re making a) an issue out of it, and b) framing the story in such a way that it gives the impression that he bought his appointment, because that’s exactly what the headline screams. Emmett Macfarlane sees an issue, but I’m having a hard time buying it.

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/892368713848147970

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/892369069906825216

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/892369516889550848

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/892369907496738820

https://twitter.com/jameslhsprague/status/892386009727590400

2. … at which someone interesting or important is speaking (eg, Justice Min), but bc corporations can't make political donations …

— Howard Anglin (@howardanglin) August 1, 2017

4. This is one reason why political donations aren't given much weight in judicial appts even as an indication of personal philosophy.

— Howard Anglin (@howardanglin) August 1, 2017

6. (Unrelated, I am unperturbed by Govts appointing disproportionate #s of donors if it's a secondary effect of philosophical alignment.)

— Howard Anglin (@howardanglin) August 1, 2017

Part of my issue is the fact that we’re already at a crisis point in this country when it comes to grassroots democratic engagement, and this current media demonization of any political fundraising hurts that. The more we demand that anyone who has made donations be excluded from jobs, the worse we make the political ecosystem as a whole. Sure, once they’ve been appointed they shouldn’t make further donations – that’s fair. But the fact that he didn’t even make the maximum allowable donation over those two years, and the fact that the amount he’s donated is a couple of billable hours for him, is hardly worth getting exercised over. This isn’t America – we don’t have big money buying candidates here, nor do we have the spectre of elected judges that are entirely interested in getting re-elected. And, might I remind you, the previous government appointed Vic Toews and most of Peter MacKay’s wedding party to the bench, which seems far bigger of an ethical breach. The current government has reformed the judicial advisory committees to broaden the scope of who they’re considering, and considering how slowly the process is going, it’s not believable that they’re simply going through the party donor rolls to find a match. And while Macfarlane insists that it’s not about the dollar amount, but the perception of bias, I am very bothered by the way in which stories like this are framed adds to that perception. It’s driving the perception, not the other way around, and that is a problem when it comes to trying to fix the actual things that are breaking down about our democracy.

Good reads:

• Justin Trudeau met with Vancouver’s mayor to talk housing, transit and the opioid crisis, but not pipelines.
• The government is adding more diplomatic staff to our embassy and consulates in the US in advance of NAFTA talks.
• The government’s air passenger rights bill aims to have penalties high enough to discourage airlines from treating passengers badly.
• Apparently one of the sticking points with a softwood lumber agreement is wood coming from other countries.
• In case you were wondering, Canada “firmly condemns” the detention of opposition leaders in Venezuela.
• Kady O’Malley looks at who might replace Judy Foote in cabinet if Trudeau decides to her leave of absence has gone on too long.
• Treasury Board policy that interprets sections of the Official Languages Act is being blamed for the stagnating level of French in the public service.
• The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada personally intervened to allow LGBT groups to intervene in the Trinity Western case this fall.
• Here’s a look at the 100^th anniversary of federal income taxes in Canada.
• Maxime Bernier still out-fundraised Andrew Scheer by the end of the Conservative leadership race.
• Susan Delacourt wonders about Trudeau’s boasts in Rolling Stone matching what he’d said previously, and wonders if he needs a better ego check.
• My column looks at new headaches coming to the Senate as the list of vacancies is growing yet again.

Odds and ends:

Here are five ways in which the Queen is living her best life at 91.