A rift between the government and the Supreme Court of Canada appears to be opening as a bunch of anonymous Conservative ministers and backbenchers bravely approached National Post columnist John Ivison under the cloak of anonymity and trash-talked Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, insinuating that she lobbied against Nadon’s appointment. The Executive Legal Officer of the Supreme Court put out a release that denied any lobbying, and said that the Chief Justice was consulted by the committee of MPs that were creating the short-list of nominees, and that because of the issue of appointing a Federal Court judge in a Quebec seat was already well known, the Chief Justice also advised the justice minister and the Prime Minister’s chief of staff that it could be an issue. This happened back in July. The PMO, late in the day, put out a release of their own, insinuating that McLachlin made a cold call to Harper, which he refused because it would be inappropriate to discuss a matter before the courts – only it wasn’t before the courts, because that consultation, which was made to his chief of staff and not Harper directly, was in July – a fact that they only confirmed when the Toronto Star pressed them on it. It’s really worrying that the PMO is trying to assert that the Chief Justice did something untoward as Prime Ministers and Minsters of Justice often consult with her when there are vacancies on the bench, because the Chief Justice can advise them on what particular subject areas the Court is looking for an expert to fill. In the context of advising on a replacement for Justice Fish, there would have been nothing wrong with McLachlin consulting the government, nor with raising the point of caution about Federal Court judges. That this government has made a mess of the appointment process with their opaque committee process under the window dressing of greater accountability and transparency – of which there is actually none – and to try and come after the Court like this, is extremely unbecoming of any government. Especially when they were warned there would be a problem and went ahead with it anyway.
Tag Archives: John Duncan
Roundup: Exit John Duncan
In a surprise four-thirty on the Friday before a constituency week announcement, Aboriginal affairs minister John Duncan resigned from cabinet yesterday. To be fair, I’ve been waiting for him to resign “for health reasons” for a while, but what was surprising that the reason for said resignation was that he wrote an improper letter to the Tax Court a couple of years ago as a character reference for a constituent, which of course he should not have, and it sounds like after the Flaherty/CRTC letter affair, cabinet ministers were asked to check their files for any other potential infractions and this turned up. James Moore has been given the file for the time being, but given its size and political sensitivity at the moment, it’s likely it’ll be handed off to someone else soon, though it likely won’t signal any major changes in cabinet. Harper won’t be doing a major shuffle for a while yet – the common consensus is late June, but I’ve heard from my own sources that it may not be until next year, when it’s a little closer to the election. John Ivison says that an “all-star” will need to take the file – but they’re few and far between in the Conservative ranks, and Baird, Harper’s usual Mr. Fix-it, likes his current job with Foreign Affairs.