Contempt of Parliament

[Oleg Bach]

It is the other way around - no one has contempt for parliament that has contempt for Canadians - In time this contempt will manifest into loathing of parliament by all Canadians-- if the servant does not serve then he is pretty much useless - Parliament must serve us not just their friends - that's called corruption.

[ToadBrother]

Derek Lee, has experience with this because he did the same thing to Mulroney when the PM wouldn't turn off documents then. Lets be clear here, the Tories made a mistake by NOT coming out in the open and saying that detainees were being tortured by the Afghans. Instead they hide it and then covered it up over and over again and its their own fault that the oppositions have to do this to get the truth. I think most Canadians want an honest government,(is there one)and the Tories are hiding behind security reasons. Perhaps they could hire Chretien and Mulroney along with the judge to look over the documents and give us the answers.

I think two things are at play. On the one hand, this is about saving face. All the insistence last fall that nothing untoward happened is more and more looking like it was false, and if there's one thing politicians are utterly incapable of doing, it's apologizing for their own bad decisions (they always seem keen to apologize for someone else's though). The other is that MacKay represents the PC wing of the party, and if he falls (or is it when, now) it could create some serious stress lines in the party, so I suspect that, in part, this wasn't to save the government any particular embarrassment, but to save MacKay's hide.

The Government's position, legally at least, is absolutely untenable. The Government has absolutely no authority to deprive Parliament of anything it demands. Governments only serve at the pleasure of Parliament, and they get as long a leash as Parliament gives them. The Tories are gambling (not without justification) that the Opposition won't pull the plug and vote no confidence, but it's clear that at least some Opposition members are trying to ponder ways to put pressure on the Government without the nuclear option. Certainly seeing three senior cabinet ministers found in contempt, maybe jailed (though I find this unlikely).

Who I really feel sorry for here is the Speaker, but his duty is clear, his most sacred and basic job is the protection of the rights and privileges of the House of Commons; not the Government and not any single Opposition party. While Milliken may try to find some compromise solution, if the Opposition is insistent, then we're going to see some more seldom-used powers of yet another ancient office. The Government may be able to afford to thumb its nose at the Opposition, but to do it to the Speaker is hard to envision.

Expect the same sort of nonsense from the Tory astroturfers that we saw with the 2008 prorogation. I'm sure, if it comes down to it, they'll condemn the Speaker as some sort of Partisan hack. The one thing the Tories clearly have no respect for is for Parliament or its offices.

Edited March 18, 2010 by ToadBrother

[ZZelda]

So this is how it begins. The little Tory trolls come out, say the most moronic things, and the cycle of astroturfing begins again.

If you're not just some pathetic troll, I'll ask you, who is the boss, Government or Parliament?

Wow that was a good one must be limited in life as all you can do is call people names Must be a Lib.

[ToadBrother]

Wow that was a good one must be limited in life as all you can do is call people names Must be a Lib.

First of all, I ain't a Liberal, so you can take that off your list of "I can ignore this guy because..."

Secondly, I asked a question, which you didn't answer. I'm presuming that's because, though it may stick in your little astroturfing craw, you know the answer.

[ZZelda]

First of all, I ain't a Liberal, so you can take that off your list of "I can ignore this guy because..."

Secondly, I asked a question, which you didn't answer. I'm presuming that's because, though it may stick in your little astroturfing craw, you know the answer.

Again with the name calling. Any way; All I am saying is to defend the Butchers of BinLaden when there are thousands of Canadians that need defending that and are being tortured daily by parents, workers and peers should be more of a concern than the culture and laws of another country. It is easy to say something is wrong but much harder to find a solution. What is the solution on these detanees bring them to Toronto put them on welfare and give then an apartment. To your question; Once Canada was the Greatest Peace Maker in the would and our Prime Minister was given the Nobel Peace Prize, but since then our P.M.s have had there own agenda and it has been a One Man Show. We are not a nation that should go to War and should never have entered it at all. Have A Good One

[nicky10013]

Again with the name calling. Any way; All I am saying is to defend the Butchers of BinLaden when there are thousands of Canadians that need defending that and are being tortured daily by parents, workers and peers should be more of a concern than the culture and laws of another country. It is easy to say something is wrong but much harder to find a solution. What is the solution on these detanees bring them to Toronto put them on welfare and give then an apartment. To your question; Once Canada was the Greatest Peace Maker in the would and our Prime Minister was given the Nobel Peace Prize, but since then our P.M.s have had there own agenda and it has been a One Man Show. We are not a nation that should go to War and should never have entered it at all. Have A Good One

Considering the nature of this post I'd say you deserve the name calling. This is the most moronic post I've ever seen.

[ToadBrother]

Again with the name calling. Any way; All I am saying is to defend the Butchers of BinLaden when there are thousands of Canadians that need defending that and are being tortured daily by parents, workers and peers should be more of a concern than the culture and laws of another country. It is easy to say something is wrong but much harder to find a solution. What is the solution on these detanees bring them to Toronto put them on welfare and give then an apartment. To your question; Once Canada was the Greatest Peace Maker in the would and our Prime Minister was given the Nobel Peace Prize, but since then our P.M.s have had there own agenda and it has been a One Man Show. We are not a nation that should go to War and should never have entered it at all. Have A Good One

None of this is the least bit relevant. I asked a question. Is Parliament supreme over the Government or is it not? Why won't you answer a simple question?

To enlighten you. I think the Opposition is being irresponsible, I don't think this is the time, while troops are still on the ground, to be doing this, but I support without reservation Parliament's most ancient rights to demand any and all infromation that Government has at its disposal. For me it's the principle. The Government is violating our constitution.

Edited March 19, 2010 by ToadBrother

[blueblood]

To enlighten you. I think the Opposition is being irresponsible, I don't think this is the time, while troops are still on the ground, to be doing this...

And this is the out the gov't has up its sleeve. Had the opposition waited and bided their time until the conflict is over, the gov't wouldn't have a leg to stand on. In the middle of a war, where it can go either way, it is not only irresponsible for parliament to be playing these games, its dangerous.

[ToadBrother]

And this is the out the gov't has up its sleeve. Had the opposition waited and bided their time until the conflict is over, the gov't wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

The government doesn't have a legal leg to stand on either way. If Parliament will not buy its arguments that this poses a risk to national security, then the Government certainly has the moral high ground, but not the constitutional high ground.

In the middle of a war, where it can go either way, it is not only irresponsible for parliament to be playing these games, its dangerous.

That may be true, but Parliament trumps government. The Speaker has no latitude so far as I can tell. Those Ministers have no constitutional right to withhold any government document from Parliament. To my mind, if the Government feels that strongly about it, then let's have an election where the Government can directly make its case to the people. But our constitution is very clear, Section 18 of the BNA Act leaves no doubt that Parliament commands the Government in all things. Section 18 doesn't reference Government. It references Parliament's rights and privileges.

It's a damned pity that Parliament hadn't chosen some other time to finally say "We command you absolutely" to Government, but sometimes the fight presents itself regardless of any other factors. If the shoe were on the other foot and it was a Liberal government doing this, you can bet you guys would be here screaming bloody murder about the rights and powers of Parliament being trampled.

The Government could simply agree to present the documents to the Foreign Affairs Committee in camera. If the Government has specific security concerns about any MP on that committee they could certainly say so. But they're not, which suggests that they have no such concern.

At any rate, our constitution does not afford reviews by external agents like former SC justices. Parliament is the fundamental legislative and oversight bodu, not the Government, which exists only because Parliament says it does. That is the fundamental makeup of our system since Charles I was finally forced to recall Parliament at the end of the Personal Rule. I suggest all you Tory supporters ponder that. If you wish some other constitutional arrangement, then by all means suggest amendments to the constitution, otherwise admit the Government is violating the constitution.

Edited March 19, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Smallc]

In the middle of a war, where it can go either way, it is not only irresponsible for parliament to be playing these games, its dangerous.

On the contrary, it is Parliament doing exactly the kind of things that it is supposed to do. The governing and legislating of the country doesn't stop simply because we are at war.

[ToadBrother]

On the contrary, it is Parliament doing exactly the kind of things that it is supposed to do. The governing and legislating of the country doesn't stop simply because we are at war.

It strikes me that Charles I probably felt justified in proroguing Parliament, and to some extent probably was justified, because Parliament was making his foreign policy objectives extraordinarily difficult. Just because it may actually not be right for Parliament to budge its nose into the goings on of His or Her Majesty's Government's affairs is not an excuse for violating the rights of Parliament to do so. If it's that bad, then a government in a country that believes in the rule of law just has to wash its hands of the affair and do what it is constitutionally required to do. If it does end up damaging foreign policy, putting soldiers at risk or pissing off our allies, then the Opposition will have to wear it.

Edited March 19, 2010 by ToadBrother

[blueblood]

On the contrary, it is Parliament doing exactly the kind of things that it is supposed to do. The governing and legislating of the country doesn't stop simply because we are at war.

What parliament is doing right now is straight up games, and using the legallity of the constitution to not only justify it, but defend it. The problem that brings debate to this issue is that parliament is full of opportunistic schiesters, that are out to score political points at the expense of the soldiers (that would be all sides).

We have all the time in the world to hash out the documents, why now? It's opportunism. Let the soldiers fight their fight and deal with the outcome when its finished.

The problem I see is that some parliamentarians don't realize the amount of responsibility they have concerning highly classified documents. To play with the national security of our country because the constitution permits it is putting our country on the trolley tracks for trouble.

As for violating the constitution, unless those documents are destroyed, the gov't can take all the time it wants to hand them over.

[capricorn]

We have all the time in the world to hash out the documents, why now? It's opportunism. Let the soldiers fight their fight and deal with the outcome when its finished.

I hadn't thought of this. Why not wait till 2011 then it won't matter if the Taliban read the coverage in our media.

[charter.rights]

What parliament is doing right now is straight up games, and using the legallity of the constitution to not only justify it, but defend it. The problem that brings debate to this issue is that parliament is full of opportunistic schiesters, that are out to score political points at the expense of the soldiers (that would be all sides).

We have all the time in the world to hash out the documents, why now? It's opportunism. Let the soldiers fight their fight and deal with the outcome when its finished.

The problem I see is that some parliamentarians don't realize the amount of responsibility they have concerning highly classified documents. To play with the national security of our country because the constitution permits it is putting our country on the trolley tracks for trouble.

As for violating the constitution, unless those documents are destroyed, the gov't can take all the time it wants to hand them over.

Nothing more than an apologetic for criminal, contemptuous behavior.

The government MUST hand over the documents without touch ups. They cannot hide their culpability by not producing the documents or by editing out their guilt.

And no the government cannot take all the time they want. The speaker will rule whether or not the past months refusal is "reasonable" and if not then the ministers are in for it.

[Mr.Canada]

Nothing more than an apologetic for criminal, contemptuous behavior.

The government MUST hand over the documents without touch ups. They cannot hide their culpability by not producing the documents or by editing out their guilt.

And no the government cannot take all the time they want. The speaker will rule whether or not the past months refusal is "reasonable" and if not then the ministers are in for it.

Things are a matter of national security. I want PM Harper to keep me safe. He is Canada's father and a good father takes care of his children, doesn't abandon them to set up another one. I am sure this concept is foreign to the left wing.

[ToadBrother]

As for violating the constitution, unless those documents are destroyed, the gov't can take all the time it wants to hand them over.

Charles I couldn't have said it better himself, that is until he became lighter the weight of his head.

Right or wrong, Parliament commands Government. You don't like it, propose some alternative governing system.

[blueblood]

Charles I couldn't have said it better himself, that is until he became lighter the weight of his head.

Right or wrong, Parliament commands Government. You don't like it, propose some alternative governing system.

I'm not saying it doesn't. If parliament wants to play games, then games it shall be.

[charter.rights]

I'm not saying it doesn't. If parliament wants to play games, then games it shall be.

The role of Parliament is to keep the government accountable. It isn't "a game" it is hard reality that looks out for the interests of all Canadians. National security is no more at risk by the Harper government keeping the information close at hand as it would be with a Parliamentary Committee sworn fo secrecy. It can be advised by CSIS, the RCMP and the Armed Forces equally as well as the government can.

We already know that the Conservative government authorized, and knew that detainees were being handed to the Afghans and they there were being tortured. The did nothing about it and even as they are being confronted about it, fully deny their involvement. That is exactly the reason that the Parliamentary Committee must have access to the information and records. And if Harper, or any of the ministers under his thumb are culpable then all Canadians have a right to know.

Get over it. Your precious Conservatives got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. It was only a matter of time.

[blueblood]

The role of Parliament is to keep the government accountable. It isn't "a game" it is hard reality that looks out for the interests of all Canadians. National security is no more at risk by the Harper government keeping the information close at hand as it would be with a Parliamentary Committee sworn fo secrecy. It can be advised by CSIS, the RCMP and the Armed Forces equally as well as the government can.

We already know that the Conservative government authorized, and knew that detainees were being handed to the Afghans and they there were being tortured. The did nothing about it and even as they are being confronted about it, fully deny their involvement. That is exactly the reason that the Parliamentary Committee must have access to the information and records. And if Harper, or any of the ministers under his thumb are culpable then all Canadians have a right to know.

Get over it. Your precious Conservatives got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. It was only a matter of time.

Here's the deal.

1) All parties of parliament are full of opportunistic schiesters.

2) If this isn't a game, then why not wait until the end of the war when there is much less risk posed to the troops.

3) I don't recall deadlines being part of the law. The only trouble the gov't can get in is if the documents are destroyed, which they are not.

4) Nobody but a select amt. of people knows whats in those documents. There could very well be things in there that could compromise the safety of the troops.

5) the only reason this is brought up now is because the nature of parliamentarians is to be opportunistic schiesters. Nobody cares about the afghans, only about getting power and getting it by any means necessary as quick as possible.

The question I pose is why would any government want to risk national security/the troops in the middle of the war all because the opposition wants to literally play games? What the gov't is doing is just as legal as the opposition. It's like a drunk driving court case, the defence attorney is going to use every trick in the book he's allowed to in order to get his client off - and some of the time it works.

Not only this, there could be potential blowback for the Liberals, being as prisoners under their watch were sent to Guantanamo Bay. Waterboarding anyone?

[bloodyminded]

What parliament is doing right now is straight up games, and using the legallity of the constitution to not only justify it, but defend it. The problem that brings debate to this issue is that parliament is full of opportunistic schiesters, that are out to score political points at the expense of the soldiers (that would be all sides).

We have all the time in the world to hash out the documents, why now? It's opportunism. Let the soldiers fight their fight and deal with the outcome when its finished.

It is not the soldiers' fight. They are, at least theoretically, fighting on behalf of Canada, and (NOT theoretically, but explicitly) at the behest of the civilian authority. "We" don't "let" the soldiers do anything. We order them to do or not to do.

Edited March 20, 2010 by bloodyminded

[fellowtraveller]

you seem to think that would be a bad thing by which you're assuming Canadians will agree it's ok to be in contempt just as the conservatives thought Canadians would be ok with prorogation...

I sincerely believe that most Canadians don't give a shit about prooragtion, and they don't gice a shit about detainees either. They also don't give a shit about the latest Liberal/CBC 'crisis', which is curbing the power of the PMO. Pretty laughable, bringing this up with a minority govt, after watching Chretien run rampant over Parliament for years and nobody cared then. Odd, that.

Nope, if you want to manufacture a crisis, best to focus on what matters now: jobs.

[fellowtraveller]

How does it follow that it is a confidence motion? Contempt of Parliament itself proscribes no particular punishment. I agree that if Harper were sent to jail over this, that this would create a crisis, but if they just choose to find him in contempt, without removal of privilege or any further punishment, explain to me how this constitutes a Confidence Motion?

Are you the first to trot out the newest version of the Conservative Party's Take On Our Constitution? Is this an example of what the spin doctors from party HQ will be telling their willing minions to spread about?

Contempt of Parliament is a very serious charge, similar to treason.

If any Ministers or the PM is found guilty of this, the govt must fall. Of course.

Any theories on how Layton and Ignatieff will scramble to abvoid forcing the govt out?

[Topaz]

Contempt of Parliament is a very serious charge, similar to treason.

If any Ministers or the PM is found guilty of this, the govt must fall. Of course.

Any theories on how Layton and Ignatieff will scramble to abvoid forcing the govt out?

I think that's what Harper wants the government to fall, have another election, while pointing out I didn't do it, THEY, the opposition did it!! Then having the arrogant attitude the Tories have they would be re-election and everything would start over again like before and he would get the chance to shuffle his cabinet , yet again.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I think that's what Harper wants the government to fall, have another election, while pointing out I didn't do it, THEY, the opposition did it!! Then having the arrogant attitude the Tories have they would be re-election and everything would start over again like before and he would get the chance to shuffle his cabinet , yet again.

Now for the real question ... Is Steve that smart?

[charter.rights]

Contempt of Parliament is a very serious charge, similar to treason.

If any Ministers or the PM is found guilty of this, the govt must fall. Of course.

Any theories on how Layton and Ignatieff will scramble to abvoid forcing the govt out?

They could go to the GG and ask her to give them a chance at government.