The hot topic of the day happens to be the NDP requesting an ethics investigation into the floor crossing of Belinda Stronach. Although it was a year ago, I guess what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
On this topic, I would like to point out a few things.
1) PM Harper appointed a non elected member into the Senate
2) PM Harper asked David Emerson, a Liberal, to join the Cabinet
3) PM Harper has told the ethics commissioner, Bernard Shapiro to stuff his investigation on the basis that Cabinet appointees are strictly the prerogative of the Prime Minister. I agree that if Shapiro succeeds in making Harper look bad in the floor crossing, it would be a serious overstepping of the position of the ethics commissioner.
Everyone and their brother has said that these are things the Accountability Act was supposed to stop. Well DUH!! Do we have an Accountability Act in place yet? No. Do we have elected Senators in place yet? No. So until it is passed, why would a PM not do whatever his prerogative allows?
Should the Act not get passed, then all of these things will STILL be allowed without question. i.e. PM Harper is not sparing the rod to spoil the child. He is clearly making a statement of somekind to the opposition. If I had to guess it would be something to the effect of “Pass the Accountability Act or I will continue to use every power the Liberals beat us over the head with, which is completely within my right.”
I like it. Firm, yet fair. Both legal, yet giving indication that change is needed. But, ultimately, these decisions to put a Quebec Banker in charge of Public Works which should make Quebecers feel better, to put representation in Vancouver with the key to the softwood lumber dispute, and to show an unqualified, biased ethics commissioner the door, are all good for Canada. They may not be perceived well in the public, but they should be respected for being good decisions for Canada.
In either case, I think Stephen Harper has clearly indicated that whether or not the Accountability Act is passed, he will use whatever power his office holds to ensure Canada is served well. No matter what the cost.
What more could we ask for in a leader?
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 591
I understand the dilemma you face and emphasize. However, it is nonsense to swear My party, right or wrong, when that party does things which are wrong.
Your gloss on Harper’s actions is factually incorrect, and your conclusions equally wrong, for these reasons:
• The Ethics Commissioner is a officer of Parliament with powers granted him, and an obligation placed upon him, to investigate any complaint lodged by a Member of Parliament. Investitation of a complaint is not the same as finding that a breach of ethical principles has taken place.
• Therefore, Harper’s refusal to cooperate with the Commissioner is legally incorrect for a Prime Minister, and politically inept.
• Harper’s statement that it is his right to appoint members of his Cabinet is correct, but misleading. This is not the issue. The issue is whether Harper and/or Emerson breached the ethical standards applicable. If they did, the Commissioner has to decide on a remedy.
• Harper’s defence of his position means he has placed himself above the law. This is not the position a Prime Minister should take in a democracy founded on the rule of law. Harper is not a king; the divine right died out ages ago. Nor is he an infallible pope. He is an MP and subject to the laws like every other citizen of Canada.
• Harper campaigned vigorously on a platform of reform, and rode the corruption issue into power with his narrow majority. The onus is on him to govern in accordance with his platform, which was heavily weighted towards good, clean government. His actions in flouting the law re the Commissioner do not meet this test.
• Harper is obliged to introduce legislation as soon as possible in order to bring in an appropriate accountability law, without loopholes. Once such a law is in place, it will apply in future, and replace any existing laws which are amended by the new law. Hopefully, given his campaign promises, the new law will address the issue of MPs who cross the floor.
• It is in the interests of all Canadians that government be carried on in an ethical fashion. Harper’s response to the Ethics Commissioner falls short of this standard, and should not be countnanced by specious arguments such as yours. The citizens of Canada deserve better, and you as a citizen have a right to call Harper and others on their actions, and demand the highest ethical behaviour from them.
Perhaps the only good that will come from this sorry debacle is that we have adquate legislation passed to uphold high ethical standards for our elected representatives.
Pingback:
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 591
luggage