"Foot In Mouth" Disease Plagues NDP

Mulder

Sometimes in an attempt to appear self-righteous, the glaring “foot in mouth” disease makes an appearance. It is times like this when one needs to bring up the past to emphasize the values of those making the self-righteous statements.

Stephen Taylor has a couple of great posts here and here which knock the wind out of the NDP and those who would defend Bernard Shapiro’s decision to investigate the PM on the floor crossing of David Emerson.

Below are a couple of choice excerpts:

Consider that the NDP (again the 3rd party) didn’t ask for an investigation into the floor-crossing of Belinda Stronach into government (the NDP needed their budget amendment passed, didn’t they — how ethical) UPDATE: They now have… but it’s still long after the ‘NDP budget’ was passed. Perhaps the Ethics Commissioner should look into this delay in the NDP asking for a Stronach investigation?

Consider that the NDP Vancouver-Kingsway opponent Ian Waddell supported the notion of floor crossing when he was a member of the BC Provincial legislature.

Consider that the NDP tried to get Sheila Copps to defect from the Liberal party to join the NDP.

Consider that the NDP tried to get Charles Caccia to defect from the Liberal party to join the NDP.

Both Copps and Caccia were facing losses of their Liberal nominations during Paul Martin’s polarizing power grab and the NDP offered both secured nominations with the NDP.

Consider that former NDP leader Ed Broadbent says that the Ethics Commissioner does not enjoy the confidence of Parliament.

Consider that current NDP leader Jack Layton is pushing for Shapiro to investigate.

In fact, consider that the NDP tabled a non-confidence motion in Shapiro at the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. That was then, the NDP has confidence in him now that he’s investigating Emerson and the Conservatives.

and

Now, let’s deconstruct Jack Layton’s partisan silliness about what is supposed to be a non-partisan officer of Parliament. Jack should be working towards matching Broadbent’s legacy.

“I don’t want to impugn his honesty but the way [Shapiro] has handled the office, it leaves open the clear question of his impartiality because of what he has decided to do or what he has decided not to do” — Ed Broadbent, Edmonton Journal, May 11, 2005 

 

Is Jack “shocked” at Broadbent’s criticism? 

“He should seriously think about [resigning] … Mr. Shapiro has not performed well. This is a serious political position he’s in, and it’s a complex position. But he … demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about what ministerial accountability means.” — Ed Broadbent, Globe and Mail, June 3rd 2005 

 

Ed thinks Shapiro should have resigned long ago… 

“I think it’s totally, utterly, completely unacceptable and Mr. Shapiro should resign … On decision after decision, he’s made simply the wrong decision” — Ed Broadbent, Ottawa Citizen, June 18th 2005