Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


Reserving judgment

In brief, on the reported deal signed by the Liberals, BQ and Conservatives over access to detainee documents, which the NDP refused to sign, I’m the last person in the Liberal blogosphere to give apologies for the Liberal Party if I think they’re doing something strategy wise based on fear of causing an election, rather then standing on principle, but I’m going to hold off on condemning them on this deal they’ve made until I see how it’s played out.

The reason? The Bloc Quebecois are almost as inclined as the NDP in delighting at making the Liberals look bad if they can, and they are a party with strong polling in Quebec that would give them no fear over the Conservatives threatening an election if they were found in contempt of Parliament. They’ve also been very vocal about access to documents, and their constituency demands it as well. Yet, they agreed with the Liberals that the compromise was acceptable and met the standard of Parliamentary supremacy.

I find that causes me to take a step back from going after the LPC strategists and leadership for now (who I will readily admit seem to base a lot of their strategy less on principle and more these days on election avoidance, even if it makes them look weak in voter’s and their own grassroots supporters eyes) and take a wait-and-see approach.

As an aside, the 2 Liberal MP’s on this committee of MP;s to oversee documents is Bryon Wilfert and Stephane Dion. I’ve no issue with either one… but I’d really like to see the “eminent jurors” panel makeup too, to see if that’s a fair impartial body not inclined to defer to the government over documents.


2 comments to Reserving judgment

  • Ottlib

    And don’t put it past the NDP that they have decided to do a little grandstanding on this issue.

    The NDP under Jack Layton have never turned down an opportunity to attack the Liberals and in many cases they have gone out of their way to do so, often subordinating the public good to their partisan interests.

    This could be just another example of that so I would take anything they say with a truck load of salt.

    • ck

      Ottlib, I have to agree with you there. I have been observing this kind of behavior you just described by the NDP. It’s also why I found the whole idea of a merger between them (LIberals) and the NDP illogical because of their behavior.

      Me thinks the NDP doth protest a little too much. I think that perhaps all this grandstanding has more to do with pointing to Canadians “See? There goes Iggy voting with Steve again…”, sure to get the left winged liberals so infuriated with their own party that they may vote NDP next election.

      Keep in mind, it still looks like Jack isn’t going to whip his MPs into voting against c391.

      Maybe this is more about proving to Canadians that no such merger is in the works louder than the media and those dinosaurs are.

      Scott: the fact that the Bloc Quebecois went along with this deal hasn’t escaped me neither. In fact, I’m puzzled by it myself. Duceppe has always gone and always will go on a case by case basis, voting according to what is or is not in Quebec’s best interests. Duceppe’s riding is one of hippie/artist/some yuppy types; largely separatist, who would balk at the idea of torture. In fact, if Canada were guilty, this would further fuel the sovereignty war chest.

      I have my own theory regarding the Bloc, but trying to research it further before I blog about it.

      I didn’t hold any illusions: If one read Speaker Milliken’s decision, they would have seen that it did provide quite a large loophole for the Harpercons.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.