Coderre quits. Don't let the door, etc.

I had family visiting from BC last week so I’ve been on a blogging hiatus, and now that I’m back one of the posts I’d planned to write was one congratulating Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff for listening to both the grassroots and senior members of his party about the Outrement situation and making the right call by allowing Martin Cauchon to contest an open nomination in the riding and Nathalie Le Prohon to do the same in Jeanne-Le Ber. Now, things have developed further this morning with Coderre announcing his resignation as defence critic and Quebec lieutenant:

"It is a tough decision, a very emotional one that I have to make today," Coderre told a Montreal news conference on Monday. "But I took four days on my own...and I thought that I don't have any more the moral authority to remain as the Quebec lieutenant."

First, to the earlier doings. As I wrote earlier, the initial decision to not allow Cauchon to seek an open nomination in Outremont was a mistake. He’s exactly the kind of experienced, progressive candidate we need on the team and allowing him to seek the nomination in his old riding should have been a no-brainer. Ignatieff erred initially in backing Coderre’s decision to block Cauchon, particularly given that Coderre has seemed more interested in preparing for his own future leadership campaign and blocking potential rivals then in doing his job, organizing Quebec for Ignatieff and the Liberal Party for the next election.

After a major outcry from the grassroots, from the blogsphere, from senior Liberals and even Members of Parliament, Ignatieff did exactly the right thing in re-visiting the situation, and allowing Cauchon and Le Prohon to contest open nominations. It was a victory for the party as a whole, and an example of real leadership by Ignatieff: that he’s willing to listen to criticism and reverse an incorrect decision when a compelling argument is made. I was a little surprised, frankly, but very pleasantly so.

Now, as for Coderre’s resignation today, frankly, it was inevitable and necessary. He really had little choice. Ignatieff reversed his call on Outremont and Cauchon. And while Ignatieff made the right call in doing so, it did cut Coderre’s legs out from under him, and would have left him largely impotent in the Quebec organizer role, unable to speak with the weight of the leader. He had to resign.

And let me say that I, for one (of many, many Liberals), couldn’t be happier. We’re going to read many pundits opining how Coderre’s departure is a bad thing for the Liberals, that it will mean trouble organizing in Quebec, that it speaks ill of Ignatieff’s leadership, and so on. That’s all bollocks, and amusing given the low opinion all the critics actually hold of Coderre.

Coderre was an embarrassment as defence critic, unloved and running his own agenda as Quebec lieutenant, and his departure from both positions will be a positive for the party. Instead of someone who has been dividing Quebec Liberals, trying to muscle aside rivals, trying to push out incumbents, we can have someone working to build a more open and inclusive party in the province, someone who will work to build the organization and find the best candidates, period.

This is all very inside baseball. Canadians don’t care who the Liberal Party’s Quebec lieutenant is. The pundits will bray, but it’s just white noise and they’ll move on soon enough. Internally, however, a divisive force has been removed from the equation and that will result in a stronger Quebec organization, better able to fight the next election.

In the long game, this is a good day for the Liberal Party. And I know very few Liberals who would disagree.

Au revoir, Denis. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Liberals are making a mistake in Outremont

I sincerely hope Michael Ignatieff will reconsider his decision, and allow Martin Cauchon to contest the Liberal nomination in Outremont. Cauchon is the kind of person we need on the Liberal team, and sidelining him is a mistake:

Quebec politics have always puzzled me and Quebec Liberal politics have always infuriated me. And I'm feeling both emotions the more I read about how the Liberal Party is blocking popular former MP and cabinet minister Martin Cauchon from even seeking the Liberal nomination in the riding of Outremont.
(read more)

Scott Tribe, Steve V., John Lennard and Dan Arnold have also written on the topic.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

The sovereigntists, Denis Coderre, Michael and me

Back when we were going to have a real-live leadership race, and I was trying to decide who to support, if there was one concern I had about supporting Michael Ignatieff it was his past positions on Quebec issues, and his Quebec organization.

I disagreed vehemently with Michael’s handling of and position on the Quebec as a nation issue during the last leadership race. I felt it was empty symbolism that would only raise artificial expectations amongst sovereigntists we weren’t prepared to meet while, in the end, solving nothing.

And as a Stéphane Dion supporter, I was (and am), frankly, pissed off at what I viewed as an at least Ignatieff-sympathetic Quebec Liberal organization that, at best, sat on its hands while Dion tried to rebuild the party following his leadership win. His lackluster performance as defence critic aside, the fact Denis Coderre refused to serve as Quebec lieutenant when Dion asked was appalling.

In the end, I decided the nation thing seemed like a dead issue, that overall Michael was the best choice for leader, and that it wouldn’t be fair to hold him responsible for the actions of those who have supported him in the past.

So, needless to say, I read this news with interest:

Michael Ignatieff's Quebec lieutenant says he is wooing disaffected sovereigntists and members of the stumbling Action democratique du Québec to the federal Liberal fold for the next election.

Liberal MP Denis Coderre said Monday that he has had talks with "fatigued" sovereigntists about possibly running for the Liberals in the next federal election. However, he would not identify those to whom he has spoken.

Members of the provincial ADQ, which has been reduced to third place in the legislature and is searching for a new leader, are also being courted.

While I’m certainly not ready to say this is troubling, I think it does bear watching. And it does cause me worry of backsliding to a Martin/Lapierre-style approach to Quebec that crashed and burned spectacularly.

If Coderre is going to be bringing in “fatigued sovereigntists” and former ADQers I’ll just say I hope they’re vetted very closely. Frankly, the ADQ has advocated some troubling policies and has attracted some questionable characters.

If there is real, honest support to be found there for the Liberal Party, people who have come to a federalist position, and support the principles of the Liberal Party, than so be it. I’m all for reaching out, and I’ll give Denis the benefit of the doubt as I watch with a wary eye.

But before we go too far down this road, let’s remember the history here. It’s a history of failure.

Brian Mulroney brought in Lucien Bouchard, we all know how that turned out. Martin and Lapierre failed. The Conservatives tried this approach too, compete with the BQ for soft-nationalists. It worked for the short-term but they couldn’t keep up with the rising price, and now they’re in a shambles in Quebec. The NDP is playing in this sandbox too, and it hasn't gotten them anywhere.

The Liberal Party should and must be the federalist champion. The unapologetic defender of a strong and united Canada. The party of the Clarity Act. The party that, while respecting provincial jurisdictions, believes in an activist federal government that uses its resources and powers to drive national interests, priorities and programs.

Anyone who is comfortable in that Liberal Party is cool with me.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Leadership leaderboard updates

Martha Hall-Findlay is out:

Martha Hall Findlay, the appealing underdog candidate for the national Liberal leadership in 2006, announced Tuesday she won't be running for the office when the party holds its next leadership convention in Vancouver in May.

Denis Coderre is out:

Il y a longuement et sérieusement réfléchi, mais Denis Coderre a finalement pris une décision. Le député de Bourassa ne se portera pas candidat à la direction du Parti libéral du Canada (PLC). Son heure, croit-il, n'est pas venue, et il est en outre déçu que sa formation n'ait pas osé moderniser la formule de sélection du leader.

Gerard Kennedy is probably out:

Kennedy will issue an official statement later today, CTV's Roger Smith reported Wednesday. Although he is well known within the party, Smith reported the Liberals may not want a "third choice" contender after selecting current leader Stephane Dion the last time. Dion came from behind to beat out frontrunners Ignatieff and Bob Rae in 2006.

"I think Mr. Kennedy would face questions about his judgment considering how Mr. Dion performed as leader," Smith said. Dion led the Liberals to one of the biggest defeats in party history, after losing nearly 20 seats following last month's federal election.

And Michael Ignatieff will be in shortly:

Michael Ignatieff is poised to formally announce Thursday that he will run for the leadership of the federal Liberal party.

And, of course, Bob Rae and Dominic Leblanc have already signaled their intent to run.

It’s disappointing that Martha and Gerard are not running. I’m sure they have their reasons for making their decisions, which I respect. They’re bright lights in the Liberal Party though, and definitely leaders of the future. At the least, it will be good to have them in the House of Commons with Stephane Dion in the coming months, holding the Harper Conservatives to account. With Iggy and Bob out on the trail, it will be a chance for Gerard in particular to take a leading role in Question Period and on the Hill, and I look forward to seeing grow into the role and nail it.

The suspense has been killing me, so it’s good to see Ignatieff confirming he actually does intend to run. I was beginning to wonder if he has going to sit this one out…ok, not really.

It’s shaping up to be a very interesting race, with three strong candidates so far. Ignatieff is a charismatic orator with an inspiring vision that has learned a lot about retail politics since 2006. Rae is a veteran and skilled politician that is one of the best campaigners in the game. And Leblanc marries generational change with strong Liberal roots and a compelling focus on party renewal.

We’ll see if anyone else gets in, but that’s not a bad field at all.

P.S. I think Roger Smith is full of it on Kennedy and Dion. No one “blames” Kennedy for Dion, not that there’s any need for blame. Liberals voted for Dion for a variety of reasons I needn’t rehash here and now. WE voted for him. If someone wants to question judgment, they should question their own. Anyway, anyone who seeks to gain leadership support by attacking former supporters of Gerard Kennedy or Stephane Dion will find themselves up shit creek pretty quickly.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

So long Denis

As far as I’m concerned, this is the biggest news out of today’s shuffling of the Liberal critic portfolios:

• Denis Coderre becomes the Liberal Critic for Canadian Heritage, la Francophonie and Official Languages;

• Bryon Wilfert, formerly Associate Foreign Affairs Critic, becomes Defence Critic;

I know little about Wilfert’s views on defence issues, it’s certainly a promotion though for the Dion loyalist.

He has to, however, be an improvement in the defence portfolio from Denis Coderre. The guy was ineffective and an embarrassment and I’ve been arguing for some time that he had to go from that job. So I’m glad he is, and moving to heritage would have to be seen as a demotion. I shan’t shed a tear over that either.

• Bob Rae continues as the Liberal Party’s Foreign Affairs Critic and will join the Priorities and Planning Committee;

• Martha Hall Findlay becomes Associate Finance Critic, and will also join the Priorities and Planning Committee;

• Joyce Murray becomes Vice-Chair of the Caucus Committee on Environmental Sustainability;

• Geoff Regan replaces John Godfrey as Chair of the Caucus Committee on Environmental Sustainability;

• Gerard Kennedy becomes Critic for Intergovernmental Affairs; and

• Senator James Cowan and Dr. Bernard Patry join the Priorities and Planning Committee.

Good to see Gerard Kennedy in there, as a former Ontario cabinet minister he could be a good point-man against the Harper/Flaherty Ontario sucks campaign. Working his way into those stories would also help to raise his visibility and be a good boost in his campaign to unseat the NDP's Peggy Nash in the next campaign.

And no sign of the move supposed “senior Liberals” or “Dion advisors” or whatever they’re pretending they are these days called for in the media earlier today, namely dumping Michael Ignatieff as deputy leader and replacing him with, I suppose, the unnamed person whose agenda they’re really advancing.

Thank-goodness that, for once, the really stupid advice of these supposed “senior Liberals” was ignored. Lets hope it starts a new trend.

ELSEWHERE: Also with takes on the shuffle are Calgary Grit and Cherniak on Politics.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Has Stephen Harper jumped the shark?

I mean, seriously, his comments on ethnicity in the House of Commons yesterday come completely out of right field, and are so completely lacking grounding in reality, that one is almost forced to consider if he needs medical attention.

If you haven’t been paying attention, there’s a mini-scandal brewing around lobbying and the PMO. Specifically, Harper’s deputy press secretary, Dimitri Soudas and a Quebec Conservative organizer, Leo Housakos.

A joint investigation by the Globe and Mail and Radio-Canada is alleging that a member of the Prime Minister's Office and a Conservative fundraiser directly interfered in a pair of political dossiers.

The report, which aired on the CBC's French-language service on Tuesday night, alleges PMO spokesman Dimitri Soudas intervened in favour of a Montreal real estate developer currently embroiled in a lawsuit with the federal government, and sat in on a meeting with representatives of an international military contractor looking to sell its wares.

There’s a lot of angles to this, of course, and the issue apparently dominated yesterday’s question period. No surprise there. What is surprising is this comment by Stephen Harper, in response to a BQ question. I’ll include both Q&A from Hansard for context, or lack thereof:

Mr. Michel Guimond (Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot ignore this issue and plead ignorance regarding the representations made by Housakos, and he cannot claim that this individual was a complete stranger, since it is his government that appointed him to VIA Rail.

In this context, will the Prime Minister tell us whether he ever met with M. Housakos at 24 Sussex Drive, his official residence?

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Bloc member mentioned the names of two individuals of Greek origin, namely one employee who works here in Ottawa, and another who is a Conservative Party supporter, in Montreal. The fact that there are two Montrealers of Greek origin does not mean there is a plot.

That accusation, as you can see, is completely out of right field. There was never any prior mention made by any opposition party as to the ethnic origin of anyone involved. I wanted to wait to comment on this until today because I wanted to check the Hansard, and indeed the first person to say “Greek” during QP yesterday was Harper.

There is absolutely no basis for Harper to “play the race card” here. And for him to try to use ethnicity to deflect from the possible ethical transgressions of one of his senior advisers is disgusting, and doesn’t befit a Prime Minister of Canada.

Continuing on through Hansard, Liberal Denis Coderre described Harper’s “racially-based comments” as “degrading” in a preamble before another question on the lobbying issue, a question Peter Van Loan took, ignoring the racial issue. A little later the BQ came back up though and addressed it more directly; Harper answered, and ignored.

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, in response to one of my questions, the Prime Minister suggested that we are asking questions about the influence peddling in his office, because the people involved are Greek. That is the same type of response we got from the Liberals to our questions about Alfonso Gagliano. Those are crass arguments.

Instead of using such arguments, could the Prime Minister simply answer my question? Did he ever meet with Leo Housakos at 24 Sussex?

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, there is a big difference here. This company has not received any special favours or treatment. I do not understand the Bloc Québécois' complaint.

It wasn’t until after QP, during points of order, that the reprehensible comments of the PM were directly addressed by my MP, Liberal John Cannis, who is Greek himself:

Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of privilege predicated by the type of answers that the Prime Minister gave to some of the questions he was asked.

The Minister of Health is shaking his head, but when he faces the Greek Canadian community in the future, I will remind him.

I do not want to be interrupted. I have served five terms in this honourable House. I have had the honour and the privilege of representing my country Canada abroad and proudly see, as I look around this honourable chamber, the diversity that makes this great country of ours.

The Prime Minister in his response today put a black mark on the over half a million Greek Canadians who played even a small role in the development of this great country.

The Prime Minister insulted the entire Greek community. I want to get to the bottom of it. When answering questions that he was asked, why was it necessary for the Prime Minister and others to continually refer to these two people, Housakos and Soudas who works in his office, who supposedly acted improperly lobbying him, as Greek Canadians? I do not see how that ties together.

Mr. Speaker, we have all faced difficult issues, dealt with difficult problems, but never before in my tenure in the last five parliaments or before, have I ever experienced this.

I would ask the Prime Minister on behalf of over half a million Greek Canadians, some of whom even supported that party, to send them a card like he has done in the past and apologize. I demand that he stand in the House and apologize publicly to each and every Greek Canadian.

In closing, permit me if you will, Mr. Speaker, to say that this is a dark day for the Greek Canadian community and each and every Canadian of Greek origin. They came to do things differently as the Reform Party. They proved--

I guess Harper had left the chamber as it was Conservative house leader Peter Van Loan that replied to Cannis’ point of privilege. You may recall he was the guy that told us only Conservatives are real Canadians.

Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. Speaker, there has been a characterization put on the Prime Minister's comments that is not at all in accord with the Prime Minister's intention nor with what he said. In fact, I believe the Prime Minister was defending the people of Greek origin from what seemed to be unremitting attacks from the opposition.

Leo Housakos, whose character was repeatedly attacked by members of all the opposition parties, is a very proud member of the Greek community whose service to the Greek community is second to none. He was director of the Montreal Hellenic Board of Trade, director of the Hellenic Academic Foundation, former director of Zoom Media, Hellas, Greece, and former executive vice-president of the Hellenic Congress of Quebec. This is someone of whom we are very proud. I believe that is the point the Prime Minister was making.

We should not be attacking these people. We should be taking pride in their origins, as we are, and be proud they have an opportunity to play a role in the mainstream of this country. It is not a crime for them to speak to people in the government. They should be allowed to participate in the mainstream of our country.

OK, is Peter Van Loan on crack? I mean, seriously. No one was attacking them for being Greek, or because they’re Greek. That’s ridiculous. When I attack Van Loan and Harper it’s not because they’re middle-aged white guys, it’s because they’re idiots.

As I said, no one raised ethnicity as an issue until Harper did. And then Van Loan goes further, suggesting somehow the opposition is questioning their right to participate in the mainstream of the country? First, bite me Peter. Second, where? Where exactly did that happen? Show me.

This is a transparent and pathetic attempt by Harper and Van Loan to divert attention from the real issue, and it’s not going to go away. And now Harper has another scandal to deal with. Hopefully he’ll do the right thing, and apologize.

And another thing…

Putting this whole thing aside, lets look again at the Conservative defence line for the influence scandal:

The government admits the meeting took place in August 2006.

But Harper pointed out that the government has not shifted its policy in the 18 months since and has continued its battle against the Montreal real-estate firm Rosdev.

"This is bizarre," Harper said in response to a question from the Bloc Quebecois.

"The Bloc is complaining that somebody - a company - didn't receive special treatment by this government."

Opposition parties called for an investigation by the federal ethics commissioner and the NDP said Soudas should be suspended in the meantime. The Bloc called the prime minister's answer unacceptable.

"What the prime minister's saying is, 'It didn't work, so that's okay,' " said Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe.

I think Duceppe has it exactly right here. It doesn’t matter that the intervention on the developers’ behalf failed. The issue is that the intervention never should have never happened in the first place. All the fact that it failed means is that Soudas probably doesn’t have a bright future as a lobbyist.

Anyway, now it’s all off to the Ethics Commissioner. But I remember when the Conservatives used to bray about the principle of Ministerial Responsibility. Does it not apply to Prime Ministers?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

The chips are falling into place...

...for a fall election. At least on the Conservative side. Even though Harper, of course totally doesn't want an election. No way Jose...

The federal government has reached a deal with Nova Scotia over offshore revenue sharing, ending a politically damaging battle with the province amid talk of a fall election.

The new arrangement will provide Nova Scotia with a guarantee that it will not lose any royalties under changes made to its cherished offshore accord in last spring's federal budget.

A deal, or a surrender by Harper to pave the way for a fall election? I don't know enough about the details to say one way or another, so I'll leave that to the experts and the spinners. I do know this though:

A three-person panel will be set up to study the value of the complex cash royalty, which was part of the province's original 1985 offshore agreement...The panel is expected to report with a binding decision, which could mean a large cash payment to the province.

A billion here, a billion there, and just in time for an election campaign. Handy that. It will be interesting to see if Bill Casey now comes back into the Conservative fold. I imagine the Cons will be putting major pressure on him to do so. (Or not, see update below) One also wonders if it will be enough to save Peter McKay's seat.

Found it a little peculiar there were no comments from Premier MacDonald in the story, just Harper, as I was interested to see how Rodney would frame it. Maybe CP will add that in later. Also interesting was that this came the day after the Newfoundland elections and Danny Williams' landslide victory. Danny, by the way, called the Nova Scotia deal a bad one:

The premier of Newfoundland and Labrador blasted the agreement in St. John‘s today, saying Prime Minister Stephen Harper has gotten Premier Rodney MacDonald to take less than he would get under the Atlantic accords, adding that Harper has “a way of preying on the weak.‘‘

So, Newfoundland is still an issue to be dealt with for the Cons, as is Saskatchewan, who the story notes are still suing the feds over equalization. Between this and the Wheat Board brouhaha the Cons are in trouble in Saskatchewan. I'd expect the NDP to take some seats from them there at the moment, and maybe if we're lucky the Liberals could sneak-in too.

After the Nova Scotia deal, if we see a quick move to appease Saskatchewan it would be an even clearer sign (were it not blindingly obvious already) that Harper is determined to go to the polls this fall.

Meanwhile, in Liberal land, Stephane Dion had a press conference yesterday and announced...well, not a lot really. He shuffled around his shadow cabinet, made Bob Rae foreign affairs critic, gave Garth Turner a job too, and booted one MP from their critic portfolio:

Mr. Dion also stripped MP Raymonde Folco of her role as official languages critic — she had told reporters that Mr. Dion was not selling in Quebec and was too old to change his ways...

Good, this was very necessary. I would have liked to have seen some of the other people that broke confidentiality and ran to the press over the Carroll thing punted too though. Still, hopefully this sends a message. While debate is good, and changes need to be made, it's important for party executives and MPs to work within the system, not through the media. Undermine the leader in public and there need to be consequences.

On an unrelated matter, I would also have liked to have seen Denis Coderre moved out of the defence critic job. I admit, that was probably impossible after the whole Afghan trip thing this week, the timing and optics would have been brutal. But while I've defended Coderre on the trip issue because I believe he's in the right there, I still would rather see someone else in that role. Nearly anyone else, to be honest.

In other news from the Dion presser:

Stéphane Dion signalled Tuesday that he will try to sidestep a fall election, and might even tell his Liberal MPs to sit out a confidence vote on the Conservative government's agenda.

Sigh. It looks like Bryan Wilfert wasn't freelancing after all, but was floating a trial balloon for the OLO. I've already articulated why I think this is an exceedingly crappy idea, and nothing I've heard since has served to change my mind. I'm not pleased to hear this. As I said earlier, we need to start standing-up for Liberal values again. Prop-up the Cons and I don't care how you spin it, it'll be bad. Jack and Gilles will be over the moon.

Finally, an example of really lame attempted Conservative spin:

Conservatives, meanwhile, scoffed that Mr. Dion has decided to avoid an election because his party is in disarray.

"The Liberals are struggling with a weak leader, thin bench strength and a tarnished brand," said Conservative party spokesman Ryan Sparrow.

Of course, the Conservatives (say they) don't want an election either. I guess that's because Harper is such a strong leader with strong bench strength and a shiny brand, right Ryan? Or maybe they're just lying when they say they want to avoid an election...

UPDATE 1: Via Garth Turner comes this exchange from Harper's presser on the Nova Scotia deal, and Bill Casey:

Question: Prime minister, now that you’ve got this agreement, are you going to welcome Mr. Casey back into the Conservative caucus?

Answer: No. Mr. Casey made demands that he knew were incompatible with our budget, that he knew that this government would not agree to and has not agreed to. Mr. Casey is not welcome into our caucus. Just so I can be as clear as i can be on it, there — when there is a next federal election there will be a conservative candidate in Mr. Casey’s riding, and it will not be Mr. Casey.

Well, I guess that settles that. As Garth says, vindictive, petty, spiteful, bully. To that I would add stupid. I could see Harper being enough of a dick to freeze Casey out if he wanted back, but what's the political upside to such a course. I've always maintained that, despite his being arrogant and wrong and all that, Harper is a smart strategist. He's lost me here though, because I don't get it. Neither does Steve.

UPDATE 2: Speaking of Carroll, something that was probably inevitable finally happened today. Since it seemed fairly clear we were heading this way, one wonders what the frick took them so long?!

Jamie Carroll has officially stepped down from the party's top administrative job and he has given up his role as deputy national campaign director as well.

The announcement comes after weeks of controversy over Carroll's allegedly dismissive response to demands that Dion include more Quebecers in his inner circle.

It's unfortunate, because I think Carroll is a good guy and that the infamous diversity remarks were blown widely out of proportion by people with their own agendas. However, I think for the good of the party and the sake of party unity he probably had to go. Rightly or wrongly, he had become a lighting rod for controversy. It dates back to his ill considered remarks in Diebel's book. It wasn't all his fault, but he had become a roadblock to progress.

Now, with Carroll gone, it will be interesting to see if the people who were calling for his ouster now get on board and start being team players working for the good of the party. Were their motives what's right for the party, or driven by their own personal agendas? With Carroll now gone, their reaction and behaviour going forward will tell the tale.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

This Hour has 22 Conservatives MPs in Afghanistan

Rather than drag Mulroney's 30lb book with me to Las Vegas (airline weight restrictions and all) I took Rick Mercer's much slimmer tome. Look for a review in a day or two, but, given the topic of yesterday's post, I was pretty interested to be reminded that Rick Mercer has been to Afghanistan three times.

His last visit last Christmas was at the personal invitation of General Rick Hillier:

On this leg of the trip were three other Newfoundlanders – broadcaster Max Keeping, singer-songwriter Damhnait Doyle and my old colleague Mary Walsh...

So, an entertain the troops visit. A very worthy trip, and one I fully support. But it wasn't just entertainers on the government-approved mission.

...and three members of the Conservative caucus – whip Jay Hill, MP Laurie Hawn and President of the Treasury Board John Baird.

Let me be very clear that I'm a big fan of Rick Mercer, and he is to be commended for going to visit the troops three times, and for his very strong support of our Armed Forces over the years. As a former Air Force Brat myself, I passionately share his sentiments in that area.

My only point is that if the government can allow an entertainer to go over three times, and allow visits by their whip, a backbench MP and the president of the treasury board, it's pretty hard for them to justify continually blocking the defence critic of the official opposition.

For more on the important, totally not a photo-op or publicity stunt work Maxime Bernier and Bev Oda are doing right now in Afghanistan, see Keith, Steve, Apply Liberally, KNB, Impolitical and Dave.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Layton and NDP side with Conservatives on Coderre's Afghan trip

As I wrote last week Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre is staging his own fact-finding trip to Afghanistan after the Conservative government, playing politics, refused to extend to the defence critic of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition the privilege of an official trip. He leaves Pakistan for Afghanistan today on a UN flight.

Mr. Coderre told CTV NewsNet in an interview Saturday he's been asking for months to go, but repeated calls to the defence minister asking for permission were ignored or rejected.

So he said he decided unilaterally to go on the fact-finding trip and report back to Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion in preparation for his own future trip to the war-torn country.

“I took my responsibility. I have a duty, I have a job to do. I am the critic for... the official Opposition,” he said. It's important, I would say, to make sure that we fully participate and contribute to the debate. So I'm gonna let them play their petty politics and I'll do my job.”

There were two interesting developments on this front this week.

Firstly, while the Conservatives continually ignored Coderre’s requests through official channels for official visit, a visit the Cons have continually attacked Liberals for not taking, they sent ministers Maxime Bernier and Bed Oda over to Afghanistan this week for a visit. It would seem this is Harper’s personal war, and while government photo-ops are a-ok, factfinding visits by opposition politicians are verboten. Mustn’t mess with the government narrative, after all.

One of the cabinet ministers visiting Afghanistan to meet with that country's leadership and Canadian troops says that roadside and suicide bombings in Kabul indicate that the situation is improving in the country.

Umm, yeah. I’ve not since being surprised by Conservative hypocrisy and classlessness, so it’s hard to be to be too surprised by their willingness to play politics with the war in Afghanistan. To send Bernier and Oda just after stories about they’re blocking Coderre’s trip does display a surprising level of both arrogance and political tone deafness, however.

The second development this week was more surprising, and at the same time not. But it would seem NDP leader Jack Layton has sided with the Conservatives on this issue:

In Toronto, federal NDP Leader Jack Layton had criticism for Mr. Coderre's solo trek.

“Involving individual MPs in a sort of ‘stunt-like' visit does pose risks.... I'm not on the ground to assess that. But you have to respect the judgement of our military leadership,” Mr. Layton told CTV NewsNet.

I’m sure our military leadership would be surprised to learn Layton feels we should respect their judgment. I won’t bother expanding on the obvious hypocrisy of that statement. I know I’m surprised to hear Layton parroting Blogging Tory talking points.

And like them, he’s wrong. The blocking of Coderre was not a military decision. It was a political decision made by the Conservative defence minister and, more likely, Stephen Harper’s office. That’s who you’re providing political cover to here Jack. Are you that desperate to score points against the Liberals you're getting in bed with the Conservatives on an issue where they're obviously full of crap?

No matter how petty the Conservatives and NDP may be back in Canada, I’m certain our military leadership in Afghanistan will respect Coderre’s position and his purpose and let him see what’s happening on the ground. I look forward to his report.

UPDATE: Steve is on the same page.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Coderre to Afghanistan

It's not often I'll say this, but good on Dennis Coderre. The Liberal defence critic is going to Afghanistan to see the situation for himself, even if the Conservative government seems to very much not want him to go:

The Montreal-area MP says he's made multiple requests with Defence Minister Peter MacKay's office but that they were systematically ignored or rejected. He said he first asked to go when Gordon O'Connor was defence minister but sometimes didn't get his calls returned.

You know, I'm not surprised at all about the hypocrisy of the Conservatives and their blogging army, who attack Liberals on the one hand for not visiting Afghanistan for themselves to see what's going on first hand, while at the same time they set up roadblocks to stop Liberals from going through official channels.

If this sounds at all familiar, it should. You'll recall the Cons also refused to let the Governor-General go visit the troops. Twice. Photo-ops by the PM and his minister though? No problemo, come on over.

So, good on Coderre for taking matters into his own hand and booking his own trip:

While visiting dignitaries generally use transportation supplied by the Department of National Defence, Mr. Coderre has made his own travel arrangements to Afghanistan and within the country.

He does not yet have permission from the Canadian government to visit the international base in Kandahar but says he's confident that he will be allowed to meet with the troops.

Will Harper and McKay deny the official opposition's defence critic the opportunity to meet with Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan? That will be very interesting to see. Hopefully, the Cons will rise above political partisanship for once. After all, Coderre is only following their advice, and going to see the situation for himself.

And Denis, I think you should go one step further. Bring Stephane Dion along. I think he should see the situation for himself as well, and then report back to Parliament. Maybe you guys can get a companion fare or something, and a double occupancy rate at the Kabul Hilton.

Coderre going is good; Dion going would be better.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Whatever happened to the NDP's 10-day ultimatum?

Yes, bear with me, it's back to the O’Connor/Hillier detainee document classification scandal. Remember that? If you don't the government’s strategy of silence and stonewalling has worked. Such is how it goes when the HoC isn’t in session and the media have short attention-spans.

Anyway, you may remember that back a few weeks ago, after the Liberals had been pushing this issue for a week, NDP defence critic Dawn Black made a media splash by issuing a news release that promised unless O’Connor explained himself within 10 days…

…Black will make a formal request under Standing Order 106 (4) for the House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence to convene and discuss this matter on 48 hours notice and to call such witnesses as it wishes including O'Connor, the Deputy Minister, the Chief of Defence Staff and all relevant officials involved in this decision.

That release was issued July 17^th. That’s 20 calendar days ago. Or 14 working days with the civic holiday factored in. Still, not a peep from O’Connor, let alone a formal letter of explanation. Their strategy is clear: keep quiet and hope it goes away.

And also not a peep from the NDP about the passing of the deadline, or Black making a formal request to call back the defence committee. I trust that will soon be forthcoming, and that the ultimatum wasn’t just intended to garner some quick and easy media headlines? Or maybe they just forgot to issue a release.

I’m disappointed this issue seems to have fallen off the Liberals’ radar too. It’s unfortunate, given that Denis Coderre was out in front of this a week before the NDP caught-on. If the NDP isn’t going to follow through on its threat perhaps the Liberals should. Because we can’t let this one go unchallenged.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

On talking points

Speaking on the war in Afghanistan, as part of the Conservative government’s new softer, not at all related to polling, line on the issue, Defence Minister Gordon O’Connor was quoted today as saying:

Speaking on CTV's Question Period, he said the training of Afghan soldiers over the next four or five months will allow Canadians to take on a reserve role some time near the end of the Vandoos' tour, which concludes next February.“We're hoping that by the end of this rotation ... the so-called Vandoos rotation, we'll have about 3,000 Afghan Army operating in the Kandahar province,” he said.

“And as we train more and more of the Afghan army to carry out their own operations, we will continue to withdraw. With more emphasis on training … at some stage [we'll] basically be in reserve.”

Certainly all sounds hopeful, and I hope it’s true. But you know, if you close your eyes and replace Afghanistan with Iraq, that kind of sounds like Donald Rumsfeld talking. Because that’s the exact same line parroted by Rumsfeld with regularity, when he still had a job (and Gordo's days are numbered, the paralells are spooky).

Hopefully it works-out better for O’Connor than it did for Rummy. I at least like it better than “cut and run” and “against the war, against the troops” which were recycled Bush/Rumsfeld talking points that Harper and O’Connor were parroting last year.

After writing most of this post I came across this Liberal news release; I’m glad to see Liberal defence critic Denis Codere is on the same page:

Mr. Coderre also compared the Minister's remarks yesterday with those made two years ago by U.S. President George Bush. In August 2005, facing pressure for his policies in Iraq, the President said "We're also training Iraqis. Our troops will come home as soon as possible. 'As soon as possible' means when those Iraqis are prepared to fight. As Iraq stands up, our coalition will stand down."

"Again we see the Conservatives borrowing from the Bush playbook," said Mr. Coderre. "Canadians deserve better than this. If the goal of the Afghan army's sufficiency comes up empty in 6 months, will further rotations of Canadian troops also be emphasizing training instead of combat? The Minister must end the politically driven double-speak and present a clear and practical strategy for Canada's mission in Afghanistan."

More importantly

On another note, so I see O’Connor was on Question Period this weekend. It’s a shame those muckraking journalist hosts, Jane Taber and Craig Oliver, didn’t see fit to question Gordo on how his department’s decision to stop releasing previously available information, such as the number of detainees captured by Canadian soldiers, meshes with the CPC’s while accountability thing, not to mention hiding behind the troops to save political embarrassment by shouting national security.

I know some unnamed veteran citizens that would be interested in his answer.

Still waiting for an elected Conservative official to defend the decision…

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

NDP joins Liberal opposition to Hillier/O'Connor detainee cover-up

I was glad to see today that the NDP has joined the Liberals in speaking out against the Hillier detainee document clamp-down, and is calling for swift and immediate action. Following two releases from Liberal defence critic Denis Coderre over the past week, the NDP weighed-in with a release of their own on the topic yesterday.

The issue, of course, is the Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Rick Hillier, issuing orders to not disclose previously available information on the number of Afghan detainees by Canadian soldiers, hiding behind national security, with the minister, Gordon O’Connor, hiding behind Hillier and refusing (or not being allowed to) defend the decision in public.

The first Liberal release was issued a week ago, and rightly called on the Information Commissioner to investigate the matter, filing a formal request with the commissioner and O’Connor:

“There is no doubt that it is in the public interest for the Information Commissioner to conduct this investigation. Canadians are asking questions about our mission in Afghanistan, and the only way to have an informed debate on the issue, is for all the facts to be laid out,” said Mr. Coderre.

“I have written to the Information Commissioner to request a formal investigation, and I have written to Minister O’Connor, asking him to take responsibility for what is happening in his department, and to reverse this politically motivated decision,” said Mr. Coderre.

The Liberals issued a second release on the matter yesterday, with O’Connor not having yet had the fortitude to address the mater publicly. The second release renewed the request for an investigation by the Information Commissioner, and called for O’Connor’s resignation:

"Enough is enough. The Minister has been the source of misinformation and confusion for too long. To avoid further exposure of his complete incompetence, he has been choking off access to legitimate requests about Canada's role in Afghanistan. He knows this is unacceptable and its time for him to go," said Mr. Coderre.

"Whether it's the cover up of the Department of Foreign Affairs report on torture in Afghanistan, or it's a blanket order to ignore the Access to Information Act, this runs against every accountability and transparency promise made by the Prime Minister in the last election campaign. Minister O'Connor can no longer hide behind his generals and his civil servants to keep Canadians in the dark about Canada's involvement in Afghanistan."

Following Coderre’s work on the issue over the past week, NDP defence critic Dawn Black released her own statement yesterday threatening to attempt to reconvene the HoC Defence committee and summon Hillier and O’Connor if O’Connor doesn’t explain himself:

“…these reports [of interference by the CDS] are concerning and I request that you advise me and relevant Parliamentarians as soon as possible as to the role the Chief of Defence Staff played in these decisions. If the reports are accurate, this would represent a major step backwards in accountability on the part of the Conservative Government, as well as a possible violation of the Access to Information Act and will have undermined the concept of civilian control over the military.”

I’m glad to see the NDP joining the Liberals in recognizing the importance of this issue and calling for action. Hopefully the BQ will come on board too and the opposition can be united here. This flagrant subjacation of Canada’s information and access laws for political ends cannot be allowed to stand, and whatever happens O’Connor has got to go.

Still hiding

And speaking of O’Connor, he still hasn’t summoned the courage to face the public on this, even through a spokesperson:

A spokeswoman for Mr. O'Connor could not confirm whether the minister had received the letter as of yesterday afternoon, but said all such requests are answered in a timely manner.

Conservative accountability: hiding behind unelected buracrats.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Agreeing with people

A busy day at work today left no time for blogging, and I've a busy night of hockey ahead of me tonight as well (go Canucks!) so let me be lazy and point to some posts by other bloggers today that I agree with.

*Firstly, I agree wholeheartedly with Ed Hollett. Stephane, Denis Coderre needs a new job and the Liberal party needs a new defence critic.

First, there was Coderre's embarrassing verbal jousting with Gen. Rick Hillier. Now, Denis is floating the idea of building a Canadian Forces base in New Brunswick solely for native soldiers. I mean, what the heck is that about? Did he run this past anyone before flapping his mouth? What would this achieve? Does he know anything about the military?

With all that is going on in the world we need a competent defence critic. It pains me to say it, but Coderre is succeeding in making Gordon O'Connor look good.

*Secondly, I agree with Glyn Evans. Conservatives, if you want to abolish the gun registry, then abolish it. And if you can't get the votes to do that, accept the will of the majority and keep it in place and effective, and heck, maybe even enhance its effectiveness.

But playing games by further extending the registration deadline is a slap in the face to the police that use it daily because you're making registry less effective, it's a slap in the face to taxpayers because you're spending more money on a program you're purposely making useless, and it's a slap in the face to democracy because you're circumventing the will of the majority of MPs that want the registry in place and effective.

Put-up or shut-up.

*Thirdly, I agree with Dan Arnold. Belinda Stronach will be missed by Blogging Tories the most. I've always defended Stronach because I've felt the attacks on her were (not unfair, that word is verboten, let's say...undeserved) but her most lasting contribution to public life has been providing oodles of blogging material. I wish her well, and hope she'll stay active pushing the issues she was passionate about, such as one member one vote and encouraging more women to enter political life.

And speaking of blogging material, I look forward to seeing how all those Conservative commenters that have always derided Stronach as useless will now spin her departure as a mortal loss and blow to the Liberal Party.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers