Something unexpected happened yesterday, in that the Defence committee voted to end the study on the allegations against General Jonathan Vance – the Liberals moving the motion, and the Bloc supporting it (which was the real surprise). Of course, ending the study comes with a number of different narratives. For the Conservatives and the NDP, this is all about the government trying to “cover up” what happened, because they won’t allow staffers to testify – nor should they. The concept of ministerial responsibility is inviolable in our constitutional framework, and the government should be fighting to maintain it, and yes, they have put the minister forward in this case several times, so that does matter. For the Liberals’ decision to move to end the study, it’s also at the request of some victims’ groups, who have stated that every past government is at fault, and that the committee is simply using the victims in order to score partisan points – and they are 100 percent correct in that assertion.

I do find it disturbing, however, that in most of the reporting on what has gone on, media have followed the opposition narrative that staffers are being “blocked” from appearing, and that the only time that ministerial responsibility is mentioned, it’s in quotes and being both-sidesed in terms of the government’s response. This is a real problem because it is undermining this fundamental principle in our democracy. This is something that should be explained, including why it’s wholly improper for the opposition to be demanding that this important principle be violated, and why when the Conservatives were in government, they repeatedly invoked the same principle as well to keep their staffers away from committee. Constitutional principles matter – they’re not just to be dismissed as a “process story” as so many journalists and editors are wont to do in this city, and it cheapens the discourse when this context is being left out of the stories, and when the government’s correct position is being spun as being improper.

Of course, if the government is going to claim ministerial responsibility, that doesn’t just mean Sajjan has to show up (which, to his credit, he did for six hours) – Sajjan has to actually take responsibility as well, and he hasn’t. And more to the point, Sajjan should fall on his sword for this, because he did drop the ball. He remained way too incurious about the allegations and whether an investigation was being carried out – which is not the same as involving himself in the investigation or meddling in it. It’s basic due diligence for someone who is responsible to Parliament for the armed forces and its leadership, and he failed in that due diligence. Sajjan has no choice but to resign over this, and it will be a giant sign that Justin Trudeau is not taking this seriously if he doesn’t insist on a resignation in short order.

Good reads:

• Justin Trudeau has been meeting with opposition leaders ahead of next week’s budget – O’Toole and Blanchet yesterday, and Singh and Paul today.
• The federal government came to a $5.9 billion agreement with Air Canada, including passenger refunds, routes being restored, and the company gets a low-interest loan.
• Bill Blair is promising a new internet regulator to help combat things like child pornography, but David Lametti warns it may not be able to target PornHub.
• Marc Garneau announced that Canada was cancelling permits for high-tech arms exports to Turkey after Canadian technology was used against Armenians last year.
• Harjit Sajjan denounced China’s land claims in the South China Sea and pushed back against notions the government is pandering to Beijing.
• UN pollution data shows that Canada’s carbon emission have stabilized, which the government argues is a good thing on the way toward making reductions.
• NSICOP tabled their annual report, showing that China and Russia have increased their espionage attacks against Canada during the pandemic.
• CSIS’ annual report came to similar conclusions, saying that biopharmaceutical and life sciences sectors were particularly being targeted.
• An internal Canadian Army report shows that a Canadian Rangers group failed to deal with brewing right-wing extremists in their ranks.
• Filipino-Canadians are calling on the parties to ensure that they are on ballots in the next election (though this implies that they are not adequately organising).
• Erin O’Toole won’t say if he will instruct his “shadow Cabinet” to vote against one of his MP’s bills on banning sex-selective abortions.
• Mike Moffatt works through a thought experiment of basic income solely on existing federal supports, and there are very few that would make this a useable exercise.
• Dan Garner explains the psychology of ignoring foreseeable problems until there is a body count, and how to avoid that for a future pandemic.
• Kevin Carmichael looks through some recent survey data on inflation, and looks at how this will likely mean the Bank of Canada will stick to their low-interest plans.
• Matt Gurney enumerates ways in which the incompetent murderclowns running Ontario have demonstrated that they have no idea what the hell they’re doing.
• Heather Scoffield looks into research on work-from-home culture, and how it affects white, racialized and immigrant workers differently.

Odds and ends:

For the CBA’s National Magazine, I look at how the debate around assisted dying is moving to a new phase, with a two-year time limit on next steps.

My book #UnbrokenMachine is currently 25% off at the @dundurnpress site, as is the book I contributed to, #RoyalProgress. If you haven’t checked them out yet, this is your opportunity. https://t.co/knf87Htrad

— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) April 5, 2021

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