Thomas Walkom on the government's proposal to have a third party review the documents pertaining to the Afghan detainee file:
Politically, Ottawa's decision to hand off the Afghan prisoner scandal to retired Supreme Court Justice Frank Iacobucci serves both Stephen Harper's Conservatives and Michael Ignatieff's Liberals.
Constitutionally, however, it is a disaster. It flies in the face of the bedrock Canadian principle that cabinet is responsible to Parliament and that a government - any government - must accede to the wishes of a majority of elected MPs.
What, exactly, is the opposition waiting for?
What Walkom and pogge said. I would add that the Liberals have other reasons to be exceptionally weak advocates on this file. Both the Chretien and Martin governments were complicit in ways I'm sure they don't want uncovered, and then Ignatieff has written approvingly of "torture-lite" -- some now claim he didn't quite mean that, but the profoundly ignorant words about sleep deprivation are right there.
Michael Ignatieff is the main reason Harper is still in office.
THat's a bit unfair Skdadl- Ignatieff has already publicly said in the House that the Liberals have no issue with any public inquiry looking at the Afghan detainee issue from the start of the Afghan mission - which of course includes the Chretien and Martin governments.
As for the contempt of Parliament stuff, it isn't just the Liberals who can put for the contempt point of order. The other 2 parties in the House can do so as well, if they chose. But, it appears everyone is content to wait. for whatever reason or strategy only known to them.
They're watching a disaster unfolding before their eyes and they're sitting on their hands and keeping one eye on the polls.
If Walkom is correct and that principle is bedrock, that is exactly what Iacobucci will say.
First off you are assuming there is an real Opposition, and secondly to are assuming that our 'government' act in the way it is mandated to operate. We know without a doubt that any Party is only their for their own benefit, and we are just the ones that pay for their entitlements. Yes Cabinet is responsible to Parliament and the Senate is responsible for sober second thought. We know that all politicians are really only responsible to their Party and their power. So why is anyone surprised? Of course all Parties are complicit in this issue--they voted to send troops to Afghanistan in the first place without knowing the fine detail.
The only country on the planet that investigates and charges torturers is Iran, but then we know how evil they are???
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html?story=/opinion/greenwald/2010/03/09/iran
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/03/afghan-detainees-liberal-government-was.html
More proof of Liberals hiding the truth
All the more reason to hold a public inquiry George. The Liberals are on record for holding one back to the time they were in power, as I said.
As for the opinion polls, Pogge.. I would think the BQ would be the least affected by worrying about those as a reason for not bringing forth the contempt of Parliament point of order; all polls show them doing as well or better then their current seat standing. But they too, have chosen to wait.
If Walkom is correct and that principle is bedrock, that is exactly what Iacobucci will say.
No doubt. But when is that likely to be? I think that's the point.
If Walkom is correct and that principle is bedrock, that is exactly what Iacobucci will say.
I'm not sure if you're meaning to suggest that the opposition should wait for Iacobucci to say it. Why? He has no official standing. He's not even a currently-serving Supreme -- he's retired. There is no reason I can see for the opposition parties to defer to Iacobucci on the meaning of a majority vote in the House of Commons.
The weakness of Canadian democracy--which was also seen in the resolutions in favour of US War Resisters in Canada--is that MPs have a "right" to instruct the government to do something, but if the government doesn't do it, the remedy is an election.
The government full knows that on smaller matters, no responsible party will demand an election--and even on something like the Afghan prisoner issue the election would soon be about who can best handle the economy, etc.
As was clear from last year's prorogation crisis, even if the majority of MPs want a broad coalition instead of minority government, the Prime Minister's control over the Governor General means that they might not even get a replacement vote when they want one.
This is an intolerable situation.