Roundup: BC Speaker drama, part III

Posted on by

While the drama over the coming BC Legislature Speaker election draws closer, and we are faced with more stories of not only the likelihood of a partisan NDP Speaker, but also one who will take off the robes to vote as an MP in committee (which is unconscionable, frankly), we see yet more boneheaded suggestions being thrown into the mix, none more so than our friends at Democracy Watch who want to turn this into an opportunity to turn the Speaker into an independent appointment, like an Officer of Parliament.

Hell. No.

This all having been said, the Speaker is the servant of the House, and to do that, he or she must be a member of it. There’s a reason why when a Speaker is elected, they are “dragged” to the Chair, because Speakers in the 1300s sometimes faced death when Parliament displeased the King. That’s not an inconsequential part of the reason why we have a Parliament in the manner that we do, and it’s important that we keep that in mind as we practice our democracy.

We also need to call out that for a group that purports to be focused on democracy, Democracy Watch is a body that seeks to limit actual democratic accountability with the imposition of innumerable independent Officers of Parliament who are appointed and unaccountable, and which seeks to codify conventions in order that they can be made justiciable with a goal of ensuring that political decisions wind up in the courts rather than at the ballot box. Theirs is not a vision of democracy, but of technocracy, and that’s not something we should aspire to, no matter what you think of our politicians.

Meanwhile, Jason Markusoff thinks that the Liberals should suck it up and put forward one of their own as Speaker for the sake of the institution (and he draws some of the lessons of New Brunswick from 2003-2006), while David Moscrop says the potential to damage the institution is too great, and it’s preferable to have another election to resolve the situation (which I’m sympathetic to). As well, Rob Shaw charts a course for redemption for Christy Clark amidst this chaos.

Good reads:

  • While on Live with Kelly and Ryan, Justin Trudeau apparently forgot that Canada has already had a woman prime minister – Kim Campbell.
  • After meeting with the president of Chile, Trudeau said that he won’t reopen the Constitution because he is focusing on Canadians’ Real Priorities™.
  • Chrystia Freeland will deliver a speech on the country’s foreign policy goals in the Commons this morning, in advance of the defence policy review on Wednesday.
  • Madeleine Meilleur testified in the Senate and contradicted some of the narratives about her nomination, while an Acadian group wants to take it to court.
  • There remain some concerns as to what portion of risk the Infrastructure Bank will be expected to assume.
  • Navdeep Bains has asked the CRTC to revisit a decision blocking a new mobile phone provider from roaming on Roger’s network.
  • Negotiations are going to start soon about ensuring that independent senators get as many as 40 percent of committee chairs and vice-chairs in the fall.
  • While complaints mount and a probe is demanded, Conservative party officials and some leadership campaign workers are calling bullshit on the complaints.
  • Chantal Hébert says she’s not seeing any signs of buyer’s remorse in Andrew Scheer’s election as party leader.
  • Martin Patriquin writes about Philippe Couillard wants to try and reopen the constitution as the opening salvo in his re-election campaign.
  • Paul Wells muses about political dynasties in Canada, and what they may signify.

Odds and ends:

A senior member of the Liberal’s research bureau and a real master of the dark arts has left the Hill for a public affairs firm. End of an era.

For the Law Times, I wrote about an Ottawa tech company suing the Competition Bureau after having been acquitted of charges of bid-rigging.

3 thoughts on “Roundup: BC Speaker drama, part III”

Comments are closed.