The all-party agreement tabled Friday implicitly recognizes that both sides of this war of words have real merit. The agreement is that an all-party committee of four MPs -- one for each party in Parliament -- and four designates will be sworn to secrecy and given access to some 10,000 pages of documents. They will review them and decide which should be released to a parliamentary committee and which remain secret. Where disputes occur, disputed documents will be submitted to a panel of three jurists, to be agreed among the parties, who will then make a final decision.Both sides of the argument have merit, regardless of what the Speaker's ruling said. The opposition parties were wise to back down from the position of the Speaker's ruling and bend to the will of the government. Everyone is happy there is no election over something as stupid as the idea of Parliamentary supremacy. These are now the official truths of our betters. Anyone who disagrees with this narrative does so at the peril of being ridiculed as "not serious".
The opposition, of course, could have demanded absolute control of the review and releases -- Jack Layton, in fact, blustered that he would settle for nothing less -- but they didn't. That they didn't was a sign that, more than anything, they didn't want to be seen as overplaying their hand and triggering an election that nobody wants.
Update: Another lonely voice suggesting that the emperor has no clothes, joins in. My only disagreement with him is his blaming of the Liberals. I see it as a joint failure by all of the opposition parties. Recommend this Post
it's the new fair and balanced government.
ReplyDeleteit's the new fair and balanced government.
ReplyDeleteAlison, the vein in my forehead is throbbing, but that just about sums it up.
Parliament is as supreme as it ever was -- it's just now endorsed the solution that Harper wants, that's all.
ReplyDeleteHad a majority stood on principle and insisted on seeing the documents, nothing could have stopped them. (Well, there might have been an election, but Harper wouldn't have gotten a majority.)
Still want to know what kind of Jedi mind tricks the PM has been using on Ignatieff.
Maybe Ignatieff was the Mole in the Liberal Party? :p
it's just now endorsed the solution that Harper wants, that's all.
ReplyDeleteIt has agreed that it is no longer the final authority over documents. It has ceded that authority to a panel of unelected and unaccountable and unchallengeable "experts".
It is impossible to say you are supreme and at the same time say you need the permission of an outside authority to see the documents you say you are supremely authorized to see. In fact, this whole thing is a farce designed to hide the weak as piss opposition, who pissed their pants, yet again at the prospect of an election.
I think the whole opposition was caught up in a combination of the Stockholm Syndrome and a hysteria to "get a deal", any deal, at any price. They are pathetic, useless, pieces of crap.
ReplyDeleteParliament delegates its authority to third parties all the time -- that's what regulatory agencies are.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, it _does_ make them look like a bunch of indecisive wimps -- but a majority has apparently signed on for that.
Strange days in Canadian politics. (Still don't see why they caved.)
Parliament delegates its authority to third parties all the time -- that's what regulatory agencies are.
ReplyDeleteFirst, regulatory agencies can have their decisions appealed. That happens to the CRTC all the time. This panel of experts cannot be overruled. What's that all about?
Second, you are right a majority did sign on to this farce and I can't make Parliament stand up for its supremacy. But make no mistake about this, if you don't have the last word about what you can see, you are no longer supreme.
As for why they cave, it's simple, they didn't want to fight an election. They are useless.
ReplyDelete