The union transparency bill has put real divisions in the Conservative senate caucus, and several of them are planning on voting against it, even more abstaining. These aren’t just the Red Tories either – one of Harper’s own appointees even spoke out against it yesterday, which is indicative that it’s a bigger problem for caucus unity, which is why Senator Marjory LeBreton, the government leader in the Senate, has been cracking the whip so harshly. Of course, the independence of its members is the whole reason why the Senate exists as it does – to provide a better check on the elected MPs when they’re up to no good for populist reasons, and this very problematic bill fits those parameters. John Ivison recounts a somewhat heated meeting between one of the MPs in favour of the bill and Senator Segal, one of the opponents.
Tag Archives: Patrick Brazeau
Roundup: Shadow MPs, and the speaking fees plot
There was quite the commotion yesterday morning as the mayor of Montreal was arrested on corruption charges, but possibly more interesting was Saulie Zajdel, a former “regional advisor to the Minister of Heritage,” otherwise known as the Shadow MP that the Conservatives installed in Irwin Cotler’s riding. It was on Zajdel’s behalf that the Conservatives robocalled Cotler’s riding with the misleading message that Cotler planned to retire and would they support Zajdel in a by-election that followed – an action that the Speaker termed “reprehensible.” In QP, James Moore tried to put some distance between himself and Zajdel, saying that the charges stemmed to Zajdel’s time as a city counsellor and his role in the regional office was coordinating events, and more telling, giving the blunt statement that if Zajdel was found to have broken the law that they should throw the book at him.
Roundup: The RCMP officially get involved
The big news yesterday was that the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Mary Dawson, has suspended her probe into the Wright-Duffy affair as the RCMP have begun a formal investigation into the matter. And then the RCMP confirmed this fact. So it’s all getting very real, ladies and gentlemen. It’s now in the big leagues, though it further gives the Conservatives an out from commenting on matters (“as this is an ongoing police investigation, it would be inappropriate to comment” will be the new line in QP). On a not-unrelated note, Liberal Senator Joseph Day is starting a campaign to close that loophole in the Conflict of Interest Act that allows public office holders to accept “gifts” including cash from friends without reporting it. Day also noted that they tried to close this loophole back in 2006 when the Accountability Act was first being debated, but the Conservatives and NDP struck it down.
Roundup: Ineligible expenses? Abolish the Commons!
Oh dear – Conservative MP Eve Adams was found to have claimed hair and nail salon visits to her election expenses, as well as personal grooming products like toothpaste, mouthwash and brushes. $2777 worth of expenses in fact, when the limit Election Canada will allow a candidate to claim is $200. But seeing as we have MPs being accused of improperly claiming elections expenses, I guess it means that the whole institution is corrupt to the core and it’s time to abolish the Commons. “Roll up the green carpet!” as the slogan goes. And the fact that she’s still in caucus and hasn’t been excommunicated for all time? Tsk, tsk. It’s just MPs trying to cover for the entitlements of their buddies. (You see where this argument goes, right?)
Roundup: Schrödinger’s secret fund
The drama of the “secret” party fund won’t let go as government MPs keep contradicting themselves. One minute there’s no fund, then there is one, but it’s the same as the rest of the Conservative Fund, so no story here, then on Saturday, Chris Alexander says it’s the same Fund, but some funds are administered by the PMO because they deal with his schedule… And yeah. It continues to confuse because nobody can get their messaging right.
Roundup: Exit Brent Rathgeber from caucus
In amidst the votes on the Estimates last night, a bombshell was dropped – Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber, lately called something of a maverick because he had become conversant and vocal about civically literate things like the roles of backbenchers, resigned from the Conservative caucus. What precipitated this was his bill on salary disclosures for public servants, which his own caucus gutted in committee. After what seemed to be a fairly brief period of consideration, Rathgeber decided that his party no longer stood for transparency and open government, and that enough was enough. The PM’s comms director tweeted shortly thereafter that Rathgeber should run in a by-election – which is a ridiculous position because a) he didn’t cross the floor, b) this was never an issue when David Emerson, Joe Commuzzi or Wajid Kahn cross the floor to the Conservatives, and c) people elect MPs, not robots to be stamped with the part logo once the votes are counted. As reactions continued to pour in, it does continue the narrative that not all is well in the Conservative party.
Roundup: Self-possessed with his aggrandizement
Oh, Senator Mike Duffy – your leaked emails keep painting quite the picture. More emails leaked to CBC yesterday showed he was trying to claim more fees and expenses from the party for his campaign activities, and while the party says they’ve never compensated him, we’ll never find out if that’s true because parties are exempt from these kinds of disclosure rules. Nevertheless, it confirms the picture that has been developing about Duffy himself, which Ralph Goodale put it best when he said “Mike Duffy was absolutely self-possessed with his aggrandizement.” Add to that picture even further with Don Martin calling Duffy out for being a sycophant actively lobbying four Prime Ministers for a Senate appointment, and for him being a faker of the highest order. Ouch. (And it’s a YouTube clip because CTV ended up pulling it down from their website). Senator Tkachuk, who has been accused of whitewashing Duffy’s audit report, now says that he’s disgusted by Duffy. And Stephen Maher writes about his own disappointment in Duffy’s behaviour leading up to and post-appointment, and the way in which Duffy’s old friends are abandoning him.
Roundup: No answers but a few red herrings
They might as well not have bothered. Harper invited the media in to watch his caucus speech, and gave a bland non-statement about how he was very upset (said in a monotone), “Yay Accountability Act!” and hey, the Senate needs to be reformed – err, except that absolutely nothing about his “reform” plans would do anything about this situation. And so, Harper said nothing about Duffy, Wallin, Brazeau, Wright, or the $90,000 cheque, and because he took no questions, some reporters started shouting them out before they were herded out. And then he got on a plane for Peru, which was planned at least a month in advance, but don’t let that stop Mulcair or the conspiracy theorists from trying to claim that he engineered the Clusterduff explosions to go off just as the trip was planned – as though there were enough competence in the PMO to pull that one off. John Ivison ripped Harper over the failure of the speech, and points to the unhappiness on the backbench that these events transpired and Harper appears to be taking it out on them, rather than looking at the events that transpired in the Centre. Michael Den Tandt writes about how this was a train wreck, and that it broke faith with Harper’s base.
Roundup: Untangling the clusterduff
It’s hard to know where to start with the constant revelations on the Senator Mike Duffy file yesterday, because they were coming pretty fast and furious, but the biggest news was that he “voluntarily” left caucus because he had become a distraction. One adds the quotation marks around “voluntary” because word is that the other members of the Conservative Senate caucus were signing a petition to have him ousted, so the writing may have been on the wall. He still wants back in, once everything is sorted and he is somehow vindicated, but considering how he and his lawyers refused to cooperate with the Deloitte auditors, and the fact that he was allegedly making that deal with Nigel Wright in order to make his expenses outrage go away, well, the desire to see his name cleared doesn’t seem to have been top of mind the past few months.
Roundup: Duffy and Brazeau are totally helping their cause
Not that it’s a big surprise, but Senator Patrick Brazeau has vowed to fight the order that he repay those living expense in the wake of that Senate audit. While he does have a point that he was cooperative and that he met all four residency requirements, unlike the other two Senators, but that doesn’t change the fact that he spent a mere ten percent of the time. Government leader in the Senate has threatened that if Senator Brazeau and Harb don’t repay their expenses – with interest – immediately, the Senate will garnish their wages, which they can do. It’s also not clear with which court they can try to challenge these audit results and the orders that the Senate itself will be voting to enforce, seeing as Parliament is actually the highest court in the land. Meanwhile, Charlie Angus wants the legal opinion that LeBreton solicited regarding Senator Mike Duffy’s eligibility to sit in the Senate based on his residency – which told LeBreton that everything was fine – made public. (As an aside, one does wonder just how many legal opinions on the Commons side are made public.) LeBreton replied that Duffy owns property and maintains a residence in the province he represents, so case closed. Ah, but perhaps not, as it was revealed last night that that there appears to have been a deal struck between Harper’s chief of staff to help Duffy with his repayment two days before he announced it, and while the PM’s spokesperson has said on the record that no taxpayer funds were used, that likely means party funds. I suppose the party may consider it fair compensation after Duffy did all of that fundraising for them, but yeah, this is totally not helping his case any more than Brazeau and Harb’s fight is helping their own. But seriously, the rest of you – the behaviour of three individual Senators is not actually indicative of the institution as a whole, and shouldn’t undo the good work that the other hundred Senators are actually doing, within the rules. The Senate’s strength as an institution is stronger than the damage caused by a couple of bad apples, and people need to be reminded of that.