Tag Archives: Conservative Leadership

Roundup: Referenda as a subversion of parliamentary democracy

Posted on by

Over in Alberta, a new bill has been tabled that amends the province’s enabling legislation to run referenda, and upon reading what’s in the bill, the NDP critic immediately sounded the alarm on what’s in the bill – that it gives the premier sole power to determine whether or not these referenda are binding, the timing, and the wording of the referendum question, and more to the point, it allows for third parties to spend as much as $500,000 in advertising – and they won’t be audited if they spend under $350,000. (Remember that in the province, during a general election, third parties can only spend $150,000 on advertising). And when said critic labelled the bill as “undemocratic,” she has been ridiculed by the premier, justice minister, and any number of halfwits over social media who insist that there is nothing more democratic than a referendum.

They’re wrong. Referenda are actually deeply undemocratic.

Why? Because anytime there is more than two simple alternatives being put to the public – and alternatives are never simple or binary – then there isn’t actually a clear question being put forward, or a clear choice involved. And at the end of the process, the government then gets to interpret those unclear results as they see fit, which is actually a means by which the premier (or equivalent – this is the case with any referendum) simply uses those results to strengthen their own control. They use the façade of putting the decision to the people to tighten their own grip on power, and democracy as a whole suffers, especially because it reduces the role and function of Parliament (or provincial legislature in this case). I would recommend that people read The Will of the People: A Modern Myth by Andrew Weale, which, while predicated on the Brexit referendum, lays out why these exercises diminish Parliament. It’s important that people understand what exactly Kenney is doing by bringing this forward.

More to the point, the reason why Kenney is bringing this bill forward is advancing the agenda of his “Fair Deal Panel,” which aims to hold referenda on things like equalization (which can’t actually do anything), opting out of the Canada Pension Plan in favour of a provincial model (which should raise alarm bells considering how the province’s existing pension plan has made a series of bad decisions), or any other number of the Panel’s recommendations for opting out of federal institutions in favour of more costly provincial ones out of spite, or as a make-work project. It’s deeply cynical, and as we’ve established, actually undemocratic wearing the guise of populist democracy, and Kenney is going to do untold damage to the province with these tools at his disposal, but people won’t care because they’ve been fooled by his rhetoric. It’s all deeply concerning, but unless the province’s opposition can up their game and actually make cogent arguments to the public, then Kenney will continue to steamroll over them.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Manufacturing an “attendance” record

Posted on by

The big headline that everyone was talking about yesterday was a load of manufactured bullshit, which shouldn’t really surprise anyone, but it was what everyone was throwing around nevertheless. The Globe and Mail crunched the numbers from the Zoom log-ins from the special COVID-19 committee that has been sitting in lieu of regular House of Commons sittings, and found that lo, the Conservatives had the worst “attendance record.” Which is kind of hilarious because it completely misunderstands how this whole farcical process works. Oh, but the Conservatives must be hypocrites, because they’re demanding full sittings! Well, no – you’ve just found some numbers that you’re applying disingenuously in order to make them look like hypocrites. It’s exactly the kind of stunt that causes people – and small-conservatives especially – to distrust the mainstream media, because it looks an awful lot like they’re not being given a fair shake. Of course, Andrew Scheer didn’t do himself any favours when he called it “Liberal spin” rather than pointing out that this was a false construction, but his inability to do anything other than meathead partisan talking points was and still is his downfall.

Why this is such bad-faith “reporting” is because it ignores the fact that there is a set speaking list every day. If you’re an MP – particularly a Conservative MP in a rural riding where you have spotty Internet to begin with – what incentive is there for you to log into Zoom and watch it that way when you have no chance to participate when you can simply follow the proceedings on CPAC and get a better experience because the translation tends to work better? It also operates on the assumption that all 338 MPs are in the House of Commons at all times when Parliament is sitting regularly, which isn’t the case – the only time all MPs are in the Chamber are during Question Period and for votes, and no, despite the sales job that the government has been trying to foist onto the public, this committee is not Question Period. Trying to hand out attendance awards for participating in a Zoom call on steroids is a waste of everyone’s time and resources, and is a distraction from the actual issues related to the calls to have proper in-person sittings – or it would be if the majority of media outlets could actually report critically on it rather than swallowing the government’s lines.

Speaking of outrage clicks, the CBC has again been misrepresenting some Senate matters, like how the Selection Committee works, as part of their story wherein Senator Dalphond is calling for committee chairs and deputy chairs to rescind their “bonuses” in the current session because of many haven’t sat because of the pandemic. But it occurs to me that it’s unlikely that chairs have even been getting their stipends because most committees haven’t even been constituted yet, which makes this look even more like this is part of Dalphond’s particular vendetta against Senator Yuen Pau Woo, and Woo’s insistence on chairing the Selection Committee, and he’s trying to use a larger point about chairs’ salaries (using false comparisons with the House of Lords as ammunition) in order to provide cover from making this look personal. I am becoming extremely concerned about Dalphond’s behaviour here – though my disappointment with how the CBC covers the Senate is pretty much standard. Cheap outrage clicks on the backs of misrepresenting the Senate is par for the course for how journalism runs in this town. (I wrote more on the backstory here).

Continue reading →

Roundup: An unequivocal no to interfering in an extradition

Posted on by

For his daily presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau once again praised the wage subsidy, and highlighted yet another business who had used it to great effect – part of his ongoing campaign to convince more businesses to take it up and re-hire their employees as the economic restart continues to ramp up. By way of announcements, he spoke of new resources being made available for people and businesses who had questions about the re-opening, and then spoke about a $100 million investment in the Merit Functional Foods plant in Winnipeg as part of the “Protein Supercluster,” and creating more plant-based foods in Canada. Trudeau also spoke about a $94 million investment that Minister Karina Gould would be announcing at the SheDecides Conference, which would go toward the health, and sexual and reproductive rights of vulnerable women around the world.

During the Q&A, he was asked about the situation of temporary foreign workers from Mexico, to which he said that they were working with source countries and business owners to ensure that there were proper protections in place, and warned that there would be consequences for those employers that failed their workers, as three have now died in Canada. On the subject of airlines’ pleas to reopen international travel, Trudeau said that they needed to be very careful about reopening it, otherwise we would see a new spike in cases as they are experiencing in some other countries who opened sooner and not as carefully as most of Canada has. And then there were a raft of questions on the fraught questions of the arbitrary detentions of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, the extradition of Meng Wanzhou, and Chinese officials sniping at Trudeau to stop making “irresponsible” comments that link the case, even though they themselves have done so.

If there was anything newsworthy out of that was the fact that when asked if Trudeau would consider making a deal to halt the extradition in exchange for releasing the Two Michaels, Trudeau gave an unequivocal no, that he would not make any deal that would undermine our judicial system. When presented with the notion that Kovrig’s family sought a legal opinion to say that the minister could indeed interfere, Trudeau again poured cold water on that suggestion, again citing the need to keep our judicial independence in place. It’s worth remembering that Trudeau was part of a G7 announcement about governments making a commitment not to pay ransoms in order to protect their citizens from being the targets of kidnappings around the world, and hostage diplomacy is just that. (And for all of the smartasses over social media who said “He already interfered with the judiciary with SNC-Lavalin,” he did not interfere with the judiciary – the charge was that he tried to interfere with the prosecution, which was not the same thing, and I remain unconvinced that it was what actually happened, no matter some of the unsavoury things that did happen with the deferred prosecution agreement legislation).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Wilson-Raybould tries to rehabilitate her image

Posted on by

There were a couple items of note that came up over the weekend, and the first was an op-ed penned by Jody Wilson-Raybould, which called for action in reforming the criminal justice system as a way of addressing systemic racism, but more curiously, offered an insistence that she tried to, but was blocked by “the centre” from doing so. I have questions. The notion that she was prevented from fulfilling one of the tasks assigned to her in her mandate letter by the PMO makes no sense whatsoever, which makes me wonder if the real issue here isn’t one of process.

Why I raise this question was the fact that there was a bunch of reporting about behind-the-scenes clashes between Wilson-Raybould and Carolyn Bennett on Indigenous self-government legislation, and Wilson-Raybould was insistent that they bulldoze ahead using criteria that she insisted on, as she felt that she was the expert in these matters, while Bennett was instead insistent that they continue to consult with Indigenous communities (because let’s face it – every time the government tries any kind of reform of existing laws concerning Indigenous people, it is immediately met with unhappy voices who tell the government to start over with consultations). It seems plausible to me that Wilson-Raybould was attempting to pursue criminal justice reforms in a manner that PMO or PCO raised concerns about. Backing up this theory are the fact that she was unable to manage her own bills as she presented them – for example, there was much fanfare over a bill to fully repeal laws that targeted gay men, but that bill was abandoned and folded into a larger bill, and that larger bill was also abandoned and folded into yet another larger bill before it was passed. She also insisted on specific provisions in the Medical Assistance in Dying legislation which everyone warned her the courts would strike down, and lo and behold, they did, and yet she was insistent. She was insistent upon random alcohol screening legislation that was almost certainly unconstitutional, and would actually make it more likely that police would use it to target Black, Indigenous or other visible minority drivers, and yet she stuck firm. She also convinced the prime minister to have Cabinet vote against the genetic discrimination legislation that came from the Senate, and went so far as to call up provinces that previously had no problem with the bill and beg them to oppose it, even after every single MP in the Chamber outside of Cabinet voted for it. After that passed, said she was going to immediately refer it to the Supreme Court of Canada (and then didn’t, but the Quebec government challenged it after she prompted them to, and that is now before the Supreme Court). So weighing all of these things, I’m sure you can understand why I might be dubious about her claims.

The other item of interest was a revisiting of Jagmeet Singh calling the Bloc House Leader a racist, and beyond people like Gilles Duceppe accusing Singh of “cheap politics,” looking at what happened through a procedural lens, you’ll find that what the Bloc objected to was introducing the motion – not the motion itself. Why? Because the usual practice is to give 48 hours’ notice for any motion so that the Commons isn’t blindsided, hence why introducing a motion without that notice period requires unanimous consent. Singh, as has become usual, introduced the motion as a performative gesture without going through the usual motions, and it’s more than plausible that the Bloc objected on procedural grounds than substantive ones, only to be rewarded by being labelled racists (never mind the fact that their support for Quebec’s Bill 21 on face-coverings may lend more substance to the charge than against it). Nevertheless, had Singh followed proper procedure, which exists for a reason, he may have had better success. Even more to the point, if he hadn’t been so quick to sign away resuming regular sittings, he could have used one of his allotted Supply Days to bring forward such a motion and have a full, formal vote on it after a full day’s debate on the subject. But he gave away that opportunity for the sake of a promise by the prime minister to talk to the premiers about sick leave rather than getting any substantive measure out of it, so he had only himself to blame ultimately.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Questions on a dubious nomination

Posted on by

For the second time in what could very well be the start of a series of media events that look suspiciously like campaign stops, prime minister Justin Trudeau was at a café and bistro in Chelsea, Quebec, near Ottawa, to tout the wage subsidy – a programme whose uptake has been hampered by the poor timing of its rollout by the government. He made a minor announcement about $15.8 million for youth green jobs in the natural resources sector, recounted his call with the premiers the night before during which his offer of $14 billion remained on the table for their safe reopening plans, and then capped it off with a plea for people to follow public health guidelines for Father’s Day.

It was during the Q&A that he expressed his “disappointment” with China over the decision to lay espionage charges against the Two Michaels being held as virtual hostages in retaliation for the arrest of Meng Wanzhou on an extradition warrant. Trudeau insisted that he continued to advocate for their release and that stuff was happening behind the scenes, but he didn’t elaborate further. He also was badgered repeatedly about the revelation that his former MP, Marwan Tabbara, was the subject of at least one sexual harassment investigation where claims were substantiated. Trudeau would only say that he was aware of the investigations and that they have a rigorous process in place where outside professionals are brought in to deal with situations when they arise, but that he couldn’t say anything more because said process was also deeply confidential by nature.

While everyone one social media spent the whole day going “I guess zero tolerance doesn’t mean zero tolerance,” ignoring the fact that it’s actually a poor idea to turf everyone at the first sign of trouble (seriously – this recent practice of kicking people out of caucus is inherently destructive and also prevents future use of social controls to keep these MPs and senators in line). I suspect that Trudeau realized that a performative “zero tolerance” policy was more trouble than it was worth and he ensured there was some nuance in how the policy was applied, and this was a case thereof, but now he also has to endure the taunts of “hypocrite!” as his explanations for the apparent change of position remain non-existent in the face of repeated questions. That said, the fact that it appears that Tabbara’s nomination took some six months to be decided upon by the green-light committee is pretty suspicious, and I would suspect they were weighing considerations, such as how much of a fundraiser he is for the party in addition to his being an incumbent. (Remember that protected nominations are antithetical to how our system is supposed to work, and that it’s proven that parties have been manipulating their nomination processes to the detriment of democracy). It would be great if Trudeau could be more frank or candid about things like Tabbara’s nomination and why he was green-lit again when the party clearly had no problem ousting other sitting MPs with little explanation (though in the case of Eva Nassif, it sounds like she was trying to meddle in other nominations for her own ends, if The Hill Times’ sources were to be believed). Then again, the party also somehow managed to be behind on getting all of their nominations in place in advance of the election when they had four gods damned years to do so, so I’m not sure what to suggest other than perhaps Trudeau’s decision to centralize yet more of his party’s power in his office as leader is going to come around bite him in the ass.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Developing an app

Posted on by

The day’s presser began with prime minister Justin Trudeau congratulating the winners of the UN Security Council seats, and gave an articulation of why it was important to Canada to try, and a promise that he would keep working to these laudable foreign development goals, even if we weren’t at the table. From there, he announced that the Canadian Digital Service, in cooperation with BlackBerry and Shopify, had been creating a mobile app to assist with contact tracing that was soon to be tested in Ontario, and this was a system that would collect no personal or location data – that it had a database of anonymized identifier numbers that could be triggered if someone tests positive – and that unlike other contact tracing apps, this one simply needed to be installed on the phone and it would run in the background, and not need to be open, which would drain the battery. (And Trudeau got really into it, because he is a geek about these kinds of things). Closing off, he spoke about new applications for the cultural industry and funds for national museums.

During the Q&A, Trudeau said that the late start to the Security Council race hurt us (and he’s not wrong there – many countries need the full eight to ten years to make a successful bid), for what it’s worth. He also made some fairly vague promises around trying to rein in the RCMP when it comes to their use of force, particularly against Black and Indigenous people. He also refused to condemn Jagmeet Singh’s outburst on Wednesday, saying it wasn’t for him to judge how a racialised leader perceived what happened.

On a completely different note, I was pleased to hear that the MPs in charge of the Centre Block renovations have decided to keep the existing footprint of the original Commons chamber, and didn’t take up the options to either expand into the lobbies behind or completely move the West wall and expand outward from there. They also say that the renovated Chamber could accommodate up to 420 MPs, but it also sounds like they may be leaning toward using benches, which would be terrific because desks are an Americanism, and simply encourage MPs to be doing work other than paying attention to the debates (and we’ve all seen the piles of Xmas cards that start showing up in the fall). I am less keen on the talk about physical distancing as part of the renovations, because they won’t be done for a decade, and we are likely to be over this pandemic by then, and we can work with the existing chamber and set-up perfectly well if we really wanted to.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Singh gets named and ejected

Posted on by

For his daily presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau announced something that was definitely not a reversal of previous assertions, stating that at fiscal “snapshot” would be released on July 8th – not an economic update, because it’s still too volatile to make any kind of projections, but a “snapshot” was just fine. And he had to explain that one was not like the other several times. He also announced new Health Canada approvals for manufacturers of testing materials and ventilators, and that they had extended a Fish and Seafood Opportunities Fund, and that Parks Canada would be gradually reopening camp sites, because some masochists in the country apparently can’t wait to go camping. During the Q&A, Trudeau pushed back over the Bloc’s assertion that he is “acting like a king,” saying that when opposition leaders complain that the prime minister acts like it’s a dictatorship when they don’t get their way undermines the strength of our democracy – and he’s not entirely wrong there, but the fact that he has been reluctant to fully recall parliament and hiding behind a deal he made with the NDP to keep it that way doesn’t do him any favours.

The coming confidence vote on the Estimates wasn’t going to the drama that some thought it might because the NDP had pretty much already pledged support after Jagmeet Singh walked back his tough talk on the CERB extension (for which he is still undeservedly taking credit), and lo, the Estimates did pass. But the drama wound up being with Jagmeet Singh, who had tried to move a unanimous motion about systemic racism in the RCMP, which was blocked by the Bloc, to which Singh called the Bloc’s House Leader a racist, and when called on it, admitted that he did so and refused to apologise for it. This created some drama, the Speaker had to be recalled (because the Commons had already resolved into Committee of the Whole), and Singh was named and forced to leave for unparliamentary behaviour. Normally when this happens – which is extremely rarely – said MP would head out to the microphone stand in the Foyer to say their piece, which is precisely why Speakers are reluctant to name MPs. Because of the pandemic, Singh couldn’t do that, and instead called a 5 PM press conference – guaranteed coverage on the 5 o’clock political shows – and repeated his calling the Bloc House Leader a racist, but in such a way that immediately a lot of voices started chirping that he made it sound like he was taking license to call anyone who disagrees with him a racist (which isn’t helpful guys, and you know it).

Of course, this also got the whole anti-civility gang on social media riled up, and yelling about why Singh became the story and not the Bloc. But that’s the thing about decorum – Singh made himself the spectacle, so that’s where the attention became, rather than him calling a press conference after the motion was denied and calling the Bloc to account at that point. (The Bloc, incidentally, defended their move by saying that the public safety committee was already studying the issue and that they should wait for their report). But seriously, decorum rules exist for a reason in Parliament, and it’s fairly inherent in the name, which is derived from the Old French parlement, meaning speaking or conference. Not becoming the spectacle would have probably put more pressure on the Bloc, but that isn’t how this played out, and because Singh repeated his accusation of racism at the press conference, where he doesn’t have parliamentary immunity, this could turn into a lawsuit, which will become an even bigger distraction from the point he was trying to make.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Singh walks back his demands

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau’s daily presser was fairly scattershot – plenty of announcements therein, but most of them fairly small. There was news that the changes to the Canada Emergency Business Account eligibility were coming on Friday, and that the new food surplus rescue programme was now open for applications. Trudeau spoke of a new global AI partnership, which would house a centre of excellence in Montreal, and that Mary Ng was participating in a meeting about World Trade Organization reform. Trudeau mentioned our troops headed back to Ukraine, before citing that he had agreed to a UN request for airlift support to transport medical supplies and humanitarian assistance. And finally, he raised the fact that it was World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, and spoke about its importance.

During the Q&A is where some of the interesting developments for the day happened, because a number of reporters asked if he was going to extend the Canada Emergency Response Benefit for a few more months, and Trudeau kept responding that the programme was about ensuring people could stay home so that we could flatten the curve of infections, and that they would have Canadians’ backs, and that they would have more to say later in the week – not guaranteeing the same programme would carry on longer. Why this was important was because Jagmeet Singh made a big song and dance that his support for the Supply Bill coming up this week – a confidence vote – would be contingent upon the CERB being extended for four more months. And by end of day, Singh was on the political shows, walking back his unequivocal statements, instead insisting that he didn’t want to be prescriptive (when that’s exactly what he was), so it sounds like the Liberals have been hinting at him a little more strongly about what they will have as a transition post-CERB. We’ll see on Wednesday, but it will likely be enough that Singh can pat himself on the back and claim victory like he did on Trudeau’s promise to talk to the provinces about paid sick leave (which they still haven’t agreed to, by the way).

The bulk of the rest of questions for Trudeau were on the two RCMP shootings in New Brunswick last week and the issue of systemic racism and what he was going to do right away about it. Trudeau responded that they were busy looking over previous reports to see what could be done immediately, and that there was more to come in the near future. This was as Progressive Senator Lilian Eva Dyck made a public call for RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki to resign or be fired given that she was unable to comprehend the problem of systemic racism in her own organization, and that it was a sign that they needed different leadership at this time of trying to address said systemic racism. Trudeau says he still has confidence in Lucki, but Dyck has certainly pushed the conversation further.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another shooting, another investigation

Posted on by

The conversation about systemic racism in policing continued over the weekend with news of another fatal shooting by policing of an Indigenous man, again in New Brunswick for the second time in a week. Both incidents seem to involve a mental health crisis situation (and a knife appears to have been involved in both cases), but it continues to point to the fact that the police are not the right people to call in such a situation because they don’t have adequate training to deal with these cases. There is a question as to why the crisis intervention units that are available in the province weren’t called in to deal with the situation – whether there is a lack of training or awareness, or if this becomes a situation where the police culture of trying to seek dominance in a situation kicks in rather than thinking it through (with especially fatal consequences for Black and Indigenous people). Nevertheless, the fact that there were two incidents in a single week should be proof enough for anyone who remains unconvinced by the scope and magnitude of the problem that this is something that needs to be addressed.

Meanwhile, it looks like Bill Blair had a conversation with RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki before she changed her tune about systemic racism in the ranks, but that changed tune and the damage control that flowed from it has now angered the association of RCMP veterans, which is falling back on the same lines about good people being tarred, because they apparently haven’t kept up with the pace of the conversation and what everyone has been pointing out to them the whole time. And while AFN National Chief says that we need to move beyond questioning whether systemic racism exists and act on eliminating it, I think we need to recognize that it’s important that we are finally calling it what it is – and this as we have pundits muttering about how we shouldn’t spend so much time on labelling it than on combatting it, but if we can’t call it what it is, then we can’t do what needs to be done to actually fix it.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Damage control and lunatic accusations

Posted on by

For his Friday presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau was back at Rideau Cottage, and he started off with the news that the Canadian Forces deployments to long-term care facilities in Ontario and Quebec would be extended until June 26th, but that the plan was to start transitioning to more assistance from the Canadian Red Cross. He mentioned the call with the premiers on Thursday night, which by all accounts got pretty testy, but Trudeau stuck to generalities. He raised the arrest video of Chief Allan Adam, saying he was shocked and that there needed to be an independent investigation, and that policing reforms across the country needed to happen soon. Finally, he mentioned that temperature checks would be implemented on flights, which raised all kinds of questions of faux-confusion that we were told that this was ineffective in detecting COVID-19 – which is true, but it was explained about eleventy times that this was simply an added measure of protection to keep people with fevers off of flights. (And lo, the pundits who seem incapable of thinking critically about public health advice have been decrying this as “added confusion,” which it’s not really). During the Q&A, Trudeau was also asked about the blood donation ban for men who have sex with men, given that NDP MP Randall Garrison has been agitating about this recently, and Trudeau reiterated the government’s position that they were funding the science that would ensure it was safe to end the ban, that they reduced it from a permanent ban to a three-month ban, and that he hoped for a positive announcement soon.

Later in the day, we saw a flurry of damage control out of the RCMP, as Commissioner Brenda Lucki clarified that yes, there is systemic racism in the Force and she should have been clearer about that, and that she has to ensure policing free of bias. As well, the Alberta Deputy Commissioner, who previously denied that systemic racism exists in the Force, said that he’s learned a lot in the past few days and he too will now admit that it exists, and promised to help eliminate it – as calls for his resignation have been mounting. Meanwhile, Winnipeg police tried to get ahead of a story with a video that showed four police grappling with, kicking, and Tasering someone during an arrest, which they insisted was someone who was violent and high on meth – but seemed incapable of admitting that it looks like more police brutality.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives have been trying to make an Issue of the fact that foreign affairs minister François-Philippe Champagne *gasp* has a $1.2 million mortgage for two London properties from a Chinese bank, that predated his time in politics. The mortgages were fully disclosed, and neither the Ethics Commissioner, CSIS or the RCMP seemed to think this was a big deal when he was either elevated to Cabinet or shuffled to his current portfolio, but now the Conservatives are accusing him of being compromised, and going easy on China – to the point that they have insinuated that he is letting the two Michaels languish in a Chinese prison – because of these mortgages. It’s a position that is ludicrously insulting because the worst thing that this Chinese Bank could do is demand immediate repayment (unlikely given the rules for financial institutions in the UK), and Champagne could have to sell those properties, which, given that property in the UK has appreciated rapidly, he could make a tidy profit. More to the point, that same Chinese bank has been operating in Canada since 1993 and had $3 billion on the books here, and there was nary a peep about it from the Conservatives in the nine years they were in power. But logic and common sense are not in play, and instead they are demanding that the Canada-China special committee be reconstituted and Champagne be hauled before it to answer about this, which is starting to reek of a McCarthy-era witch hunt, because they can’t help but engage in meathead partisanship.

Continue reading →