Elections 101: Government by Whom, Government for Whom?
First two of today's six out of 101:
Back in May, Don Martin of the National Post (of all people and all publications) obtained a copy of the "secret guidebook that details how to unleash chaos while chairing parliamentary committees".
Running some 200 pages including background material, the document - given only to Conservative chairmen - tells them how to favour government agendas, select party-friendly witnesses, coach favourable testimony, set in motion debate-obstructing delays and, if necessary, storm out of meetings to grind parliamentary business to a halt.
[T]o grind parliamentary business to a halt?! Is this the job of government? Is this leadership? For the love of Robert's Rules, this isn't even effective bureaucracy. And Mr. Harper had the utter gall to call an election because parliament was not able to "function productively"?!
In addition, the manual instructed committee chairs to disband "disruptive" committees on short notice.
To be entirely fair, Jay Hill, the Conservative MP who penned the manual, probably believes his own rhetoric about its purpose being to restore order and fairness to the discussions. It included instructions to avoid negative body language, after all. (Is there any way to storm out of a meeting while maintaining positive body language?)
The government's rationale was that coalitions of opposition committee members were ganging up on Conservatives in order to make sekkrit deals behind closed doors and bully Conservatives. Apparently, coaching witnesses, delaying debates, and storming out of meetings represent appropriate tactics for restoring transparency and civility to committee discussions. Apparently, Canadians elected a Conservative minority, rather than a coalition of opposition parties, so Conservatives should never, ever have to contend with consensus-based decision-making, when the consensus isn't favourable to them.
This isn't leadership. Body language notwithstanding, it's bullying and skullduggery.
and
The manual seems to have done its job: the Conservatives have found reasons to (among other things) scuttle the Environment Committee, storm out of the Standing Committee on International Trade, and block questions into why the government blacked out key information in a report on treatment of detainees in Afghanistan at the Commons committee on access to information, privacy and ethics.
Because leadership? Means always getting your own way.
Coming up, after choir: Benamar Benatta.
Oh, and remember the Court Challenges program? Apparently in scrapping it, the Cons violated the Official Languages Act (Hat tip.)
Back in May, Don Martin of the National Post (of all people and all publications) obtained a copy of the "secret guidebook that details how to unleash chaos while chairing parliamentary committees".
Running some 200 pages including background material, the document - given only to Conservative chairmen - tells them how to favour government agendas, select party-friendly witnesses, coach favourable testimony, set in motion debate-obstructing delays and, if necessary, storm out of meetings to grind parliamentary business to a halt.
[T]o grind parliamentary business to a halt?! Is this the job of government? Is this leadership? For the love of Robert's Rules, this isn't even effective bureaucracy. And Mr. Harper had the utter gall to call an election because parliament was not able to "function productively"?!
In addition, the manual instructed committee chairs to disband "disruptive" committees on short notice.
To be entirely fair, Jay Hill, the Conservative MP who penned the manual, probably believes his own rhetoric about its purpose being to restore order and fairness to the discussions. It included instructions to avoid negative body language, after all. (Is there any way to storm out of a meeting while maintaining positive body language?)
The government's rationale was that coalitions of opposition committee members were ganging up on Conservatives in order to make sekkrit deals behind closed doors and bully Conservatives. Apparently, coaching witnesses, delaying debates, and storming out of meetings represent appropriate tactics for restoring transparency and civility to committee discussions. Apparently, Canadians elected a Conservative minority, rather than a coalition of opposition parties, so Conservatives should never, ever have to contend with consensus-based decision-making, when the consensus isn't favourable to them.
This isn't leadership. Body language notwithstanding, it's bullying and skullduggery.
and
The manual seems to have done its job: the Conservatives have found reasons to (among other things) scuttle the Environment Committee, storm out of the Standing Committee on International Trade, and block questions into why the government blacked out key information in a report on treatment of detainees in Afghanistan at the Commons committee on access to information, privacy and ethics.
Because leadership? Means always getting your own way.
Coming up, after choir: Benamar Benatta.
Oh, and remember the Court Challenges program? Apparently in scrapping it, the Cons violated the Official Languages Act (Hat tip.)