Roundup: A question of political accountability

Posted on by

An issue that I am getting tired of writing commenting on over, and over again, is this story about the supposed political vetting of judicial candidates. The reporters on the story fail to mention the crucial constitutional details underpinning the story, Erin O’Toole lies about what the justice minister has said in response to the constant allegations, and now the president of the Canadian Bar Association is writing to the government to express his concerns that this whole thing threatens public faith in the judiciary. And here I go again.

For the eleventieth time, let me reiterate that the prime minister is politically accountable for judicial appointments under our system of Responsible Government. That means that if another bad one gets through the selection process, he has to wear it politically if things come to light – kind of like what happened around now-former Justice Robin Camp (who you may remembered wondered why a sexual assault complainant didn’t keep her knees together). This is one of the reasons why once the candidates have made it through the initial non-partisan vetting process, that they are subjected to a political screen – to ensure that nobody is aware of any particular skeletons in these potential judges’ pasts that could come around to bite them in the future. Some of the confusion here is because one of the ways in which the government has been doing this vetting has been through their voter identification database, which has been interpreted as seeing if they are donors or had lawn signs – which is a false reading of what these databases do, which is to build voter profiles, and they consume vast amounts of data to do so (which is also why there are concerns that they are not subject to federal privacy laws). But this is being deliberately framed as looking for partisan manipulation. (This is not to suggest the motives of these reporters is partisan – only that they are looking to embarrass the government, and it wouldn’t matter which party is in charge).

I am more concerned by the fact that someone is leaking to the press, and the French press especially seems to be targeted about revelations concerning a particular staffer, which suggests to me some internecine fighting within the Liberal ranks that they are willing to do damage to themselves in order to hurt this staffer in particular. But why worry about motive or the fact that you are being played when you have a potentially embarrassing headline?

Good reads:

  • Pfizer announced that their vaccine candidate is showing 90 percent effectiveness – but Canadian infectious disease specialists want to see the data, not press releases.
  • Justin Trudeau said that vaccine could be the “light at the end of the tunnel,” and that Canada has a contract for 20 million doses, with options for more.
  • Trudeau also made the first call as a world leader to Joe Biden as president-elect, and they discussed protectionism, Keystone XL, and the two Michaels in China.
  • The government announced more money to speed up the rollout of rural and remote broadband, with a goal of 98 percent connectivity by 2026.
  • It sounds like any proposed government bailout of airlines would also be contingent on limiting dividends and executive bonuses.
  • The Bank of Canada has announced the short list of eight prominent Canadians under consideration for the new $5 banknote.
  • Here are some expectations of what movement we may see on the trade and environment files under a Biden administration.
  • A BC company and a coalition of Mi’kmaq bands have come together to buy the largest producer or shellfish in North America, based in Halifax.
  • Liberal MP Yasmin Ratansi is leaving caucus and “awaiting guidance” after it was discovered she had illegally hired her sister in her constituency office.
  • Kady O’Malley’s Process Nerd column explains why the drama around the American election couldn’t happen here.

Odds and ends:

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

2 thoughts on “Roundup: A question of political accountability”

  1. Alex Trebek encouraged viewers to cultivate a genuine appreciation for learning and knowledge for its own sake. He would probably be disappointed with the abysmal level of civics education being fostered by the press and public officials in his home country, particularly at the national broadcaster where he worked for more than a decade. Ignorance breeds populism and vice versa, a self-perpetuating cycle. Carl Sagan’s birthday was this week too, and he also foresaw an era when “no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues.” Then again maybe they can, but choose the easier route of misinforming for ratings and political outrage points. At the risk of sounding cliché, treating governance as a game show puts democracy in… jeopardy.

Comments are closed.