And now we’re into competing leaks. In the Globe and Mail, we got another leak from a “mysterious” source that posited that Jody Wilson-Raybould was trying to elevate Justice Glenn Joyal to the Supreme Court of Canada because she apparently felt the LGBT community wouldn’t be receptive to presumptive heir Justice Richard Wagner (now the Chief Justice) for what I assume was a trumped up reading of his not inviting LGBT groups to present at the Supreme Court in the Trinity Western case (which is pretty absurd), and because she wanted Joyal’s successor at the Court of Queen’s Bench to be a Métis judge. In other words, it was trying to burnish Wilson-Raybould’s progressive credentials in light of the prior leaks attempting to make her look more of a social conservative (as though one didn’t need to look too hard at her record to see signs of it). Because hey, why not keep up leaks that damage the perceptions around Supreme Court of Canada appointments? Way to go, team! (And before anyone gets too self-righteous, don’t forget that in 2014, Stephen Harper leaked the six names he was considering when he named Justice Marc Nadon to the bench, and putting words in the mouths of the MPs who served on the “selection” committee at the time, knowing full well that they couldn’t respond).

Because I was asked, here it is in English. I am the only one to remember that in spring 2014, under Harper gvt, the names of the six candidates aspiring to a Supreme Court nomination were leaked? In the context of the Marc Nadon affair. #cndpoli

— Hélène Buzzetti (@HBuzzetti) March 27, 2019

And then come the denials. Wilson-Raybould and PMO each denied that they were the source of any of the leaks, and Wilson-Raybould (who submitted her additional materials to the justice committee on Tuesday afternoon) said there should be an investigation into who was leaking these Supreme Court deliberations. Lisa Raitt tried to insist that it should be the Federal Judicial Affairs Commissioner who should investigate, and he quickly wrote back with a giant nope, citing that he has no mandate to do any such investigations. Which leaves us with who for an investigation? The RCMP? Yet another demand for a public inquiry? Our very own Goolding Inquiry? Won’t that be fun?

And with all of this going on, in swoops Neil Macdonald to remind us that everyone in the media gets “used” by leakers all the time, and hey, the preponderance of leaks is a sign that journalists are doing their jobs because they are competing to do the best job. There is certainly a mercenary aspect to it all, not to mention some status-seeking, but I’m not sure he’s entirely wrong.

Good reads:

• China is advising Canada to “correct the mistakes it made earlier” regarding the current canola dispute. (Is that mistake Meng Wanzhou’s detention?)
• As might be expected, the justice department offered legal analysis regarding Trump’s comments on the Meng Wanzhou extradition (redacted, obviously).
• The budget apparently contained some serious “typing errors” in the tables that reconcile it with the Main Estimates, which will be a problem for upcoming votes.
• The “non-announced measures” in the budget aren’t getting any clearer in the current budget than they were in last year’s.
• 63 percent of Veterans Affairs’ service standards weren’t met last year. Good job, everyone!
• Small businesses are concerned about a lack of details on rebates regarding the incoming federal carbon price in provinces that don’t have one in place.
• The Conservatives are blocking some committee travel requests as part of their ongoing tactics to demand answers in the Double-Hyphen Affair.
• The Senate’s human rights committee has agreed to conduct a study in forced or coerced sterilisation of Indigenous women.
• Other maverick Liberal MP Wayne Long could face a nomination challenge, because he didn’t meet the criteria for a protected nomination in time.
• Colby Cosh points out that the media has been virtually silent on another terrorist – Pauline Marois’ would-be assassin, whose gun jammed before his attack.
• Chantal Hébert wonders how Justin Trudeau and Andrew Scheer will deal with Quebec’s forthcoming secularism bill, and its use of the Notwithstanding Clause.
• Andrew Coyne (correctly) notes that there was no outcome but chaos for Brexit, and it’s only a matter of just how much chaos they’ll get in the end.

Odds and ends:

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