So, it’s the NDP’s policy convention. So far, there’s been discord with the party’s socialist caucus, who has been agitating against changing the party’s constitutional preamble, and others who want them to forgo hearing from US Democrat speakers in favour of keeping the focus on their policy discussions, of which they only managed to pass six of the 102 on the docket yesterday. John Ivison writes more about that crack in the party unity, and how Mulcair has taken to quoting Joseph Stiglitz (who addressed the convention yesterday, and spoke about inequality – in America). Chantal Hébert writes about the leap of faith it will take for some party members to follow Mulcair’s path to what they hope will be electoral victory.
Tag Archives: Nathan Cullen
Can’t we just get things done?
Possibly the safest bet that you can make these days is on the first day that the House comes back after a break is for the likes of Nathan Cullen to come out and talk about how the caucus us “united and determined,” and how they’re going to be “proposition not opposition,” and gems like “we were sent here to get things done, not turn every issue into a political grenade.” And yet, it’s a pretty dangerous rhetorical game to start saying things like that without actually understanding what they mean.
If you ask the government, “getting things done” would mean having the opposition roll over and immediately pass everything. And if you ask the NDP, “getting things done” means that the government should abandon its agenda, see the light, and realise that the NDP have all of the answers and they’ll adopt their agenda whole-heartedly. But as we all know, reality doesn’t work that way. Everybody wants to “get things done.” The problem is deciding which things need to get done. And surprise, surprise, there are differences of opinion and belief as to which of those things need to be accomplished. It’s like it’s a democracy or something.
Roundup: The Quebec decision
There’s an election in Quebec today, and the pundit class are calling for a PQ victory, despite all of those usual caveats that we don’t trust polls, especially after what happened in the Alberta election. Curiously, the Quebec Liberals are calling for police investigations into what they call illegal robo-calls being made yesterday. Thomas Mulcair is downplaying the potential strife between his “federalist” Quebec caucus and a PQ government.
A plane hired by the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) that was carrying a banner that read “Steven Harper Hates Us” in French, was grounded after the RCMP may have been a bit overzealous about it entering restricted airspace. PSAC and the pilot say that the RCMP were concerned the banner was “hate speech,” which the RCMP deny. Note that there weren’t any charges laid, and this “Stephen Harper hates me/us” campaign has been going on from PSAC for weeks now without any particular issue (other than it’s kind of infantile). Incidentally, PSAC has gone on to endorse the PQ in the Quebec election, which is kind of odd, considering that they represent federal public servants, but “they don’t take a position on sovereignty.” Note that back in 2006, then PSAC president and now “federalist” NDP MP Nycole Turmel also endorsed the Bloc.
Roundup: Thrice lobbied
And now the Nigel Wright/Barrick Gold issue gets interesting, as a late disclosure shows that Barrick tried to lobby him on three separate occasions – despite his close personal ties to the owner’s family. I guess that now we’ll really see how narrowly the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner reads the Act before she likely declares it’s not her problem. And subsequently, how long before we hear yet another appeal from the Lobbying Commissioner to give her office some actual teeth.
The Senator Fairbairn “controversy” is now just getting ugly. National Post columnist Jonathan Kay printed the anonymous concerns of a Conservative Senator concern troll. Said concern troll is concerned that Senator Cowan has no authority over the Liberal caucus because he’s a Martin appointee and most of them are Chrétienites, and the Chrétienites wanted her kept in the Chamber. All of which is pretty ridiculous since there would be zero utility in keeping her vote going, and even more ridiculous is the part about how the PMO wants them to keep quiet, which is why said Conservative Senator wants to remain anonymous. Really, this reads like nothing more than a cowardly and ugly partisan attack that is hiding behind both anonymity and a woman with dementia, which needs to be called out for exactly what it is. It also demonstrates that this concern troll seems to labour under the impression that he’s to do the bidding of the leader’s office, which actually isn’t part of a Senator’s job description, but rather, they’re supposed to be independent, which is the half the point of why they’re appointed and not elected in the first place. They’re not supposed to take their marching order from the party leader’s office, and yet he seems to be assuming that they should be. I also find Senator LeBreton’s concerns of what might have happened if the numbers had been closer a bit rich, considering the Conservative majority in the Senate is quite secure, and that’s probably why Fairbairn was being eased out in the manner she was. Retired Senator Sharon Carstairs says that this is why Canada needs a dementia strategy, which we don’t have, and why the Senate needs more robust support systems. Here’s a speech that Fairbairn made on the topic of Alzheimer’s in 1999, with an awareness that she had a family history with it. And while we’re on the topic, can we please stop using this incident to mount up Senate “reform” hobbyhorses? It’s in poor taste, and in fact wrong to somehow equate any of these issues.
The threat of a formal request
Nathan Cullen started off this week’s Monday Morning Sanctimony with a quote from Young Stephen Harper about the very undemocratic nature of omnibus bills, and how they prevent MPs from voting on individual issues. You know, just to establish who has the monopoly on virtue. Behind him were Guy Caron and Peggy Nash, and together, they outlined the NDP strategy for tackling the undemocratic monster that is the omnibus budget implementation bill.
They’re going to make a formal request to split it up into at least five separate bills.
A formal request you say? I think Stephen Harper just broke out in a sweat. He probably can’t believe they’ve escalated things to…making a formal request.