Roundup: Philpott has more to tell, but won’t

Posted on by

The day, which was already off to a cranky start for most MPs who were voting all night, got an early, crankier start – for the Liberals, in any case – as a bombshell interview with Jane Philpott was released, in which she stated that there was more to the Double-Hyphen Affair story that needed to be told. But…she’s not going to do it. Oh, and by the way, she has no leadership ambitions, so this isn’t about that. And that was pretty much throwing a cat among the pigeons in the Commons, as suddenly the Conservatives started waving this interview about as further ammunition in their so-called protest vote-a-thon to “let her speak” (never mind that the votes have absolutely nothing to do with this Affair in any way, shape or form). And as the day wore on, other nonsense crept in, such as the Liberals fumbling a “shift change” during the votes and almost losing one of them. And incidentally, Philpott and Wilson-Raybould have been excused from the vote-a-thon, so as to not exacerbate any tensions with their sleep-deprived colleagues.

And it becomes increasingly more obvious that the way both Wilson-Raybould and Philpott are handling this is becoming a problem for all involved. Other MPs like John McKay and Judy Sgro vented by saying that if they’ve got something so important to say, that they should just raise it as a point of personal privilege in the Commons and get it over with. The former Law Clerk of the Commons, Rob Walsh, also said that they have absolute immunity in the Commons if they want to speak, and there would be no real consequences as they are no longer in Cabinet – except possibly being booted from caucus, and Trudeau reiterated that he was fine to let them stay in caucus because they’re okay with disagreement in the Liberal caucus. (He also insisted that Wilson-Raybould was not shuffled over the SNC-Lavalin DPA, yet again).

In hot takes, Matt Gurney says that Philpott is waving a red flag and we should hear what she has to say. Justice committee chair Anthony Housefather gives his reflections of what the committee heard, but also cautions that they are not a legal process and can’t be expected to behave like one. Susan Delacourt, however, is running out of patience with the drama, and notes that speaking truth to power isn’t acting like you’ve got a big secret you can be coy about. If it’s that important, then they should take any advantage they have and say what it is.

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1108917885676601344

Good reads:

  • After saying just yesterday that he didn’t say to the PM that 9000 jobs were at risk, the CEO of SNC-Lavalin is saying that 9000 jobs could be at risk.
  • The government plans to start undoing some of the changes that the Conservatives made to the social service benefits tribunals.
  • Canadian authorities are looking into whether they can force social media companies to take town extremist content, including white nationalist content.
  • Data shows that Canada is welcoming the biggest influx of immigrants since the First World War.
  • Metro Vancouver has written to Catherine McKenna and Navdeep Bains to complain about an investigation by the Competition Bureau against them.
  • The Procedure and House Affairs committee opted not to cite the RCMP for contempt of parliament – barely – over misleading web pages on gun regulations.
  • Analysts say that it could be two years before the housing measures in the budget are really felt.
  • The vague details around the electric vehicle rebate in the budget mean that sales could take a hit in the coming months until the particulars are sorted.
  • Here’s a look at the state of the debate in the Senate right now on their own motion to hold hearings on the Double-Hyphen Affair.
  • Quebec is delivering another balanced budget, and using their surplus to pay for more costly electoral promises.
  • Jennifer Robson offers an evaluation of the Canada Training Credit in the budget.
  • Donald Savoie sees the civil service’s attempts to adapt to new political realities as possibly causing them to blur some lines that they probably shouldn’t.
  • Alex Marland talks about his research on backbenchers and the pressure they feel to conform to being team players within caucuses.

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

3 thoughts on “Roundup: Philpott has more to tell, but won’t”

  1. It’s amusing how many journos have now decided they are experts in parliamentary privilege.

  2. The whole thing reeks of an internal coup. Strange women shoving swords into the prime minister’s front and back is no basis for a system of government.

    • I see that misogyny is now considered fair comment on Routine Proceedings. Sad. And “strange” women, too. Guess what that means.

Comments are closed.