tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post1034182051359240262..comments2024-02-07T16:22:39.625-05:00Comments on Jeff Jedras: In and out day two, a few textual thoughtsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-60187282823982976922008-07-31T02:50:00.000-04:002008-07-31T02:50:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Sudipta Dashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15576598115739268572noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-745306238031204612008-07-17T12:28:00.000-04:002008-07-17T12:28:00.000-04:00That's another good point Sandi, Mayrand was appoi...That's another good point Sandi, Mayrand was appointed under this government. I think technically it's parliament that makes the appointment, not the government, but it would have been Harper/the Cons that out his name forward (after they pushed-out Jean Pierre Kingsley). So it's hard for them to complain he's biased or play the Liberal appointee card.<BR/><BR/>Jason, all sides use procedure to their advantage to be sure. Putting it in a trickery handbook though, that was a new one by the Cons... As a Liberal partisan though, on this point it behooves be to point out one difference: if we're not getting our way we don't have the chair just get up and leave in a pout, leaving the meeting in limbo. Anyway, the sublties are lost on most, and no one really cares about committee behaviour anyway, I don't think. C'est lat guerre. I just found the use of these tactics against the Cons, and their outrage, amusing given the history.<BR/><BR/>Barcs, Wednesday was much more a procedural day, hashing-out the witness list for the next set of hearings. On Tuesday though, and early Wednesday, there was a lot of interesting stuff with the question of Mayrand. So the exercise wasn't a waste at all. Wednesday though was a procedural nonsense day. The saying, I think, is there's two things that you don't want to see how they're made: laws and sausages.<BR/><BR/>Ken that's why I don't have much trouble with the opposition using strict procedure to keep things moving here. The Cons already delayed these hearings by many months. Give them an inch, they'll filibuster a mile.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14971310821484459106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-41556023866430418552008-07-17T01:22:00.000-04:002008-07-17T01:22:00.000-04:00Shame on the 4 CPC members on the Ethics Committee...Shame on the 4 CPC members on the Ethics Committees whose actions and filabustering stiffled debate for the past two days. <BR/><BR/>They Tories have used these same tactics to paralyze the current minority parliament. God help us if the voters give Harper the absolute powers of a majority government. <BR/><BR/>Canada will not be a country I'll want to call home!Ken S from Ramarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16983894655094943569noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-84675942452597205202008-07-16T22:21:00.000-04:002008-07-16T22:21:00.000-04:00I was once told that in order for a panel to be p...I was once told that in order for a panel to be productive and have clear workable proposals it should consist of 3 people... 2 of whom should be absent.....<BR/><BR/>As evidenced by your own take on the events of the inquiry.... (more interesting to someone interested in procedural motions than actual business of the committee).<BR/><BR/>This seems to be much more about who can score the political points than actually getting to the bottom of the issue.<BR/><BR/>Mulroney-Schreiber anyone?<BR/><BR/><BR/>Isn't there something they could be doing that might actually be productive?<BR/><BR/>Leave the actual investigating to people (qualified) to do it?<BR/><BR/><BR/>The only impression I am left after hearings like theses is that we have too many MP's who are overpaid to do 4/5 of _-all but self-promote their own interests. All of em.Barcshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00797062032956713967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-42358062497716589482008-07-16T17:49:00.000-04:002008-07-16T17:49:00.000-04:00I was working so I didn't get a chance to see any ...I was working so I didn't get a chance to see any of this. But based on your description: well played to the oppo, I guess. And as you say, the Tories can't exactly complain about procedural fun.<BR/><BR/>But now, neither can the Libs, BQ or NDP. As you say, sauce for the goose. Nobody gets to get on their high horse anymore, it seems. Not that it'll stop either side from doing so, of course...Jason Hickmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17648786726787793783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-73908048054360012842008-07-16T17:47:00.000-04:002008-07-16T17:47:00.000-04:00..Whoops....meant to say "wasn't" Chief Electoral .....Whoops....meant to say "wasn't" Chief Electoral Officer then....<BR/><BR/>sorryRuralSandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552973218865121867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-41256464434799025352008-07-16T17:46:00.000-04:002008-07-16T17:46:00.000-04:00And the Conservatives have yet to provide any conc...And the Conservatives have yet to provide any conclusive evidence that there were. They've been fishing for months and they've come up empty. They keep harping on transfers made by the BQ that are similar. This is true. But it was also during the 2000 election, when the law was different. The courts have upheld the legality of those transactions.<BR/><BR/>...and...for what it's worth - Mayrand was Chief Electoral Officer then - later "appointed by Harper"...Liberal bias???RuralSandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552973218865121867noreply@blogger.com