{"id":2132,"date":"2013-10-28T05:31:35","date_gmt":"2013-10-28T09:31:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/?p=2132"},"modified":"2013-10-28T00:07:11","modified_gmt":"2013-10-28T04:07:11","slug":"roundup-to-amend-or-not-to-amend-the-motion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/2013\/10\/28\/roundup-to-amend-or-not-to-amend-the-motion\/","title":{"rendered":"Roundup: To amend or not to amend the motion"},"content":{"rendered":"

As we get ready for another sitting week of Parliament, we are no closer to finding any kind of clarity or resolution to the issue of the suspension motions in the Senate. In fact, there are different stories being floated in the media \u2013 some that the Conservatives there are open to compromises<\/a> in the motions, based on comments that Senator Claude Carignan, the leader of the government in the Senate, made. The PMO, meanwhile, is standing firm<\/a> that they want the suspensions without pay \u2013 not that they actually have a say in the matter, given that the Senate is the master of its own destiny and not at the beck and call of the PMO (despite what many \u2013 including a handful of senators who haven\u2019t learned better yet \u2013 may think). So that leaves the state of play still very much in motion as things get underway. Justin Trudeau, for his part, wants everyone involved to testify under oath<\/a>, feeling that\u2019s the only way everything will be cleared up. While Senator Cowan\u2019s motion to send it to a committee would give an opportunity to summon the current and former PMO staffers involved, Parliamentary committees can\u2019t summons Parliamentarians and force them to testify (because of privilege), so the really key players may yet be spared from testimony if that is the case. Law professor Carissima Mathen talks to CTV<\/a> about the legal arguments in the Senate suspension motions. Tom Clark writes about<\/a> how this is playing with the Conservative base, and how the push for swift action in the backrooms and behind closed doors is starting to look more like the Chr\u00e9tien\/Martin way of doing things, which is what the Conservatives rode into Ottawa promising to clean up.<\/p>\n

Newfoundland and Labrador senator George Furey wants people to know<\/a> that the Senate is one of the few checks available against an increasingly powerful and centralised PMO, as MPs are far more easily whipped into following the PM\u2019s line.<\/p>\n

Some Senators are apparently nervous that names will be named<\/a> by the Auditor General, though I\u2019m still wondering how many people believe this will be a forensic audit process when that\u2019s not what the AG\u2019s office does. There also appears to be an issue with his looking for their communications with their lawyers for some reason, but they are drawing a line at that, apparently.<\/p>\n

The deficit projections are $7 billion less than expected, but the Parliamentary Budget Officer wants to know why<\/a> in order to know how to base their calculations. And the opposition parties, not unsurprisingly, have their own theories as to why, and the motives behind the numbers.<\/p>\n

Bill C-377 \u2013 the \u201cunion transparency bill\u201d is headed back<\/a> to the Senate, as it never officially made it back to the Commons as amended before prorogation happened. Russ Hiebert, its sponsor, hopes that this time it\u2019ll pass unscathed, but given how many Conservatives voted against it (or abstained) the last time around, and who still object to the bill, and added to the fact that they\u2019re feeling extra rebellious now that the PM has basically cut the caucus loose in order to insulate himself from any fallout from the expenses scandal, well, Hiebert may find he\u2019s still in for a rough ride.<\/p>\n

PostMedia profiles Paul Calandra<\/a>, the Prime Minister\u2019s parliamentary secretary and the guy charged with delivering daily talking points on the Senate expense issue. Apparently he\u2019s really a nice guy who gets a lot done for his community, even the parts that aren\u2019t in his riding.<\/p>\n

Laura Stone has lunch with Pat Martin<\/a>, who talks about his bad couple of years in politics, the lawsuit that he settled out of court and is still paying for, and how he\u2019s trying to tone down the anger.<\/p>\n

Susan Delacourt writes about truthiness, spin, and the mob mentality<\/a> of an apathetic electorate, all of which are evident in droves that the various players in the current Senate drama are all playing to in spades.<\/p>\n

And Emma Teitel muses about the toxic mood<\/a> in legislatures and the level of female representation in politics, after a conversation with Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

As we get ready for another sitting week of Parliament, we are no closer to finding any kind of clarity or resolution to the issue of the suspension motions in the Senate. In fact, there are different stories being floated … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[41],"tags":[30,261,258,27,241,263,85,65,231,26],"class_list":["post-2132","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-roundup","tag-auditor-general","tag-budget-2013","tag-kathleen-wynne","tag-labour","tag-mike-duffy","tag-pamela-wallin","tag-parliamentary-budget-officer","tag-pat-martin","tag-patrick-brazeau","tag-the-senate"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2jJFQ-yo","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2132"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2132"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2132\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2133,"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2132\/revisions\/2133"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2132"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2132"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.routineproceedings.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2132"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}