Legal obligations and consequences to Iacobucci

[ToadBrother]

Cowardice.

It's not a decision to take lightly, as it would be the first time possibly in the history of the Westminster system that Ministers of the Crown would be held in contempt. If Harper ignores the Speaker's ruling, then we're in for a substantial crisis.

[msdogfood]

It's not a decision to take lightly, as it would be the first time possibly in the history of the Westminster system that Ministers of the Crown would be held in contempt. If Harper ignores the Speaker's ruling, then we're in for a substantial crisis.

So you think he is being careful??.

[ToadBrother]

So you think he is being careful??.

I think he's probably giving the Government a chance to come to its senses or for the Opposition to back down so that he doesn't have to weigh in. But unfortunately, this Parliament seems to have this habit of playing chicken and then being forced to appeal to its constitutional superiors to make the peace.

Remember, if the Speaker sides with the Opposition (which seems to be the general consensus of pretty much all the experts I've read), and the Government still refuses, then the Speaker essentially becomes part of the fray, which is not the place where Speakers over the last few hundred years have tended to be. But the Speaker's fundamental constitutional role is as the protector of Parliament, and that could very well mean a constitutional showdown with the Crown, with only two real ways out of it at that point; either the Speaker does the possibly unprecedented act of going to the Governor General to compel the Government to do as Parliament commands (which is Parliament's right under the keystone powers put forward in the Bill of Rights 1689 and the BNA Act), or the Speaker and Parliament go to the Supreme Court.

Obviously the Government hopes that the Speaker will side with them. If the Speaker does not, then I foresee that the Government will probably look at ways of attacking the Speaker. Since the Speaker was elected as a Liberal candidate (though he technically has no political affiliation once he becomes Speaker), they might try to argue that the Speaker is in fact not taking the side of Parliament, but is rather taking a partisan position (and I'll make a prediction here that if that happens, we'll see Argus, Blue Blood, Mr. Canada and all the other Tory supporters here aping that position). As well, they would probably hope for or push for the Supreme Court to weigh in, because one of Harper's overarching tactics in his Cavalier-like battles with Parliament likes to stimey them with delays. As long as the Supreme Court is involved, it essentially means the documents remain in their hands, and it could take months or longer for the Supreme Court to rule on it.

The most fascinating, and probably most frightening prospect (and the one I'm the least sure about, because I simply cannot think of any time in the last three centuries that it has happened) is that the Speaker, as the guardian of the House's rights and privileges sidesteps the Government and the Courts and goes straight to the Governor General. I don't think anyone quite knows how this is supposed to work, but our constitution makes the Speaker the conduit by which Parliament may appeal to the Crown. At that point, the GG would essentially be asked to use her Reserve Powers, which would either be to dismiss the Ministers in question or to dismiss the entire Ministry (and either ask someone else to form a government or call an election, but this has not been done since the Australian Constitutional Crisis). The GG cannot compel the Government to release the documents, but she could dismiss the Tory Government and ask, say, the Liberals to form a government, and that Government would then be able to honor the demands of Parliament.

Edited April 13, 2010 by ToadBrother

[msdogfood]

I think he's probably giving the Government a chance to come to its senses or for the Opposition to back down so that he doesn't have to weigh in. But unfortunately, this Parliament seems to have this habit of playing chicken and then being forced to appeal to its constitutional superiors to make the peace.

Remember, if the Speaker sides with the Opposition (which seems to be the general consensus of pretty much all the experts I've read), and the Government still refuses, then the Speaker essentially becomes part of the fray, which is not the place where Speakers over the last few hundred years have tended to be. But the Speaker's fundamental constitutional role is as the protector of Parliament, and that could very well mean a constitutional showdown with the Crown, with only two real ways out of it at that point; either the Speaker does the possibly unprecedented act of going to the Governor General to compel the Government to do as Parliament commands (which is Parliament's right under the keystone powers put forward in the Bill of Rights 1689 and the BNA Act), or the Speaker and Parliament go to the Supreme Court.

Obviously the Government hopes that the Speaker will side with them. If the Speaker does not, then I foresee that the Government will probably look at ways of attacking the Speaker. Since the Speaker was elected as a Liberal candidate (though he technically has no political affiliation once he becomes Speaker), they might try to argue that the Speaker is in fact not taking the side of Parliament, but is rather taking a partisan position (and I'll make a prediction here that if that happens, we'll see Argus, Blue Blood, Mr. Canada and all the other Tory supporters here aping that position). As well, they would probably hope for or push for the Supreme Court to weigh in, because one of Harper's overarching tactics in his Cavalier-like battles with Parliament likes to stimey them with delays. As long as the Supreme Court is involved, it essentially means the documents remain in their hands, and it could take months or longer for the Supreme Court to rule on it.

The most fascinating, and probably most frightening prospect (and the one I'm the least sure about, because I simply cannot think of any time in the last three centuries that it has happened) is that the Speaker, as the guardian of the House's rights and privileges sidesteps the Government and the Courts and goes straight to the Governor General. I don't think anyone quite knows how this is supposed to work, but our constitution makes the Speaker the conduit by which Parliament may appeal to the Crown. At that point, the GG would essentially be asked to use her Reserve Powers, which would either be to dismiss the Ministers in question or to dismiss the entire Ministry (and either ask someone else to form a government or call an election, but this has not been done since the Australian Constitutional Crisis). The GG cannot compel the Government to release the documents, but she could dismiss the Tory Government and ask, say, the Liberals to form a government, and that Government would then be able to honor the demands of Parliament.

This is going to get very interesting!!!

one note about the Supreme Court this the Supreme Court seems to really respect the power of parliament so if your the PMO your very scrowd!!!for the most part!.

[ToadBrother]

This is going to get very interesting!!!

one note about the Supreme Court this the Supreme Court seems to really respect the power of parliament so if your the PMO your very scrowd!!!for the most part!.

Interesting nothing. The Tories would much prefer the SC, even if they ruled against them, because it means the whole issue essentially gets buried until the SC reviews it, which could be months away. In fact, I'd wager they're probably trying to rig the whole process so it ends up going that route. They've run roughshod over the constitution, so why not even piss on an even more ancient office; the Speaker of the House of Commons?

[msdogfood]

Interesting nothing. The Tories would much prefer the SC, even if they ruled against them, because it means the whole issue essentially gets buried until the SC reviews it, which could be months away. In fact, I'd wager they're probably trying to rig the whole process so it ends up going that route. They've run roughshod over the constitution, so why not even piss on an even more ancient office; the Speaker of the House of Commons?

all very true!!.

[msdogfood]

all very true!!.

there is a rumor in the press that the decision will be handed down next week!!

[msdogfood]

Has anyone seen an update on this.??

[msdogfood]

OK no update or theory's yet??.

[ToadBrother]

OK no update or theory's yet??.

I usually go to CBC's Inside Politics blogs http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/ which often have very up to date reports on the proceedings of Committees and House proceedings. They're the ones that mentioned at the beginning of this week that the Speaker would be handing down his decision probably next week.

[msdogfood]

I usually go to CBC's Inside Politics blogs http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/ which often have very up to date reports on the proceedings of Committees and House proceedings. They're the ones that mentioned at the beginning of this week that the Speaker would be handing down his decision probably next week.

Thanks!

Everyone keeps saying he is going to hand down his decision this week than its next week so whats going on???.

[msdogfood]

MY good it worked!!.

I like the part of the speaker decision that stated if all party's can not reach a compromise than he will become involved agen

Hmm do i detect a motion of contempt if you dont play nice .!

[msdogfood]

any one making bets on wither the PMO will be taken down by all this!???.

[ToadBrother]

any one making bets on wither the PMO will be taken down by all this!???.

I don't think so. Vic Toews has already signaled that a solution may be an oath of secrecy like the US Senate does when viewing state secrets is required. The Tories will try to spin it all as a great victory for national security, but basically they know two things; 1. that the Supreme Court won't hear any case like this and that 2. only a lunatic would dare to go to the polls in the current environment.

[msdogfood]

I don't think so. Vic Toews has already signaled that a solution may be an oath of secrecy like the US Senate does when viewing state secrets is required. The Tories will try to spin it all as a great victory for national security, but basically they know two things; 1. that the Supreme Court won't hear any case like this and that 2. only a lunatic would dare to go to the polls in the current environment.

I bet the PMO will not comply with the Speaker's ruling if that is true than the opposition will not have to do anything!

the Speaker will find PMO non compliant than its bye bye PMO & party no confidence vote reciord as i understand???!!.

anyone back me up on this???.

[msdogfood]

???.

[ToadBrother]

I bet the PMO will not comply with the Speaker's ruling if that is true than the opposition will not have to do anything!

the Speaker will find PMO non compliant than its bye bye PMO & party no confidence vote reciord as i understand???!!.

anyone back me up on this???.

All the noises continue to be that a deal will be done by the end of the week. There won't be any motions on this regard. It's done. Harper knows his government can't win this. Besides, with the Guergis affair boiling out of control, he's got other fish to fry.

[eyeball]

Afghan records deadline could be extended

I knew it.

Speaking after Wednesday's meeting on Parliament Hill, Goodale suggested an extension on the deadline could be granted by Milliken if the parties can show progress is being made.

“I’m of the view that if we all say to the Speaker, 'Look, progress is being made, serious topic, never before has Parliament had to deal with this kind of a situation, let’s take some additional time to make further progress,' I suspect the Speaker would respond constructively to that," Goodale told reporters.

I suspect he will too. He is after all just another politician (spit).

These right and honorable liars have to stick together lest the little people get uppity.

[msdogfood]

Afghan records deadline could be extended

I knew it.

I suspect he will too. He is after all just another politician (spit).

These right and honorable liars have to stick together lest the little people get uppity.

Iacobucci contract terminated!!.