It should come as little surprise that in a constitutional monarchy that an oath to the monarch was considered to be constitutional by the courts. No, seriously. This was an actual court challenge. But reading over the judgement, there are some very good things in there – things like the fact that the Queen is the embodiment of the country and its laws so swearing an oath to either instead would really still be an oath to the Queen, just indirectly. It affirmed that the Canadian Crown is a separate institution from its UK counterpart, which is an important concept that many people forget. It gave a thorough trashing of the false notion that the Canadian monarchy is a foreign imposition, but rather that because of our particular evolution as a country leading up to the constitutional patriation in 1982, the monarchy is an expression of a modern and equality-protecting Canadian democracy. It also points to the value of loyal opposition, and that nothing stops them from advocating for republicanism once they’re citizens. It’s a fantastic judgement and an affirmation of the values of a constitutional monarchy, which is what these three non-citizens are seeking to be a part of after all. Pretending that you can take the Queen out of that equation is more than a little ridiculous.
Tag Archives: Environment
Roundup: More humanitarian aid for Syria
At the end of the G20 conference in Russia, Canada is pledging another $45 million in humanitarian assistance for Syrian refugees, while Harper had more harsh words about Putin and the fact that it was unacceptable that he has a veto on Security Council taking action. But Harper also put distance to the notion that we’ll be making concessions on the Canada-EU Free Trade Agreement, and said that “significant gaps” remain. Okay then. And then the biggest news of all – that Harper has basically asked Barak Obama to dictate what emissions regulations targets he wants us to set in order for the Keystone XL pipeline to be approved. It’s likely an attempt to get a firm set of numbers rather than the nebulous talk that we’re currently mired in, but so much for setting our own sovereign environmental goals and policies.
Roundup: Votes on Syria and the question of Responsible Government
In the fallout of last Friday’s vote in the British Commons regarding military action in Syria, there are some very serious questions being asked about what it all means. In part, the concerns come from the nature of Responsible Government – if the House has not expressed support for the government’s foreign policy goals, which as a Crown Prerogative – then how can they continue to claim to have confidence in that government? How is foreign policy any different on a substantive level when it comes to the conduct of a government than a budget? Philippe Lagassé and Mark Jarvis debate the issue here, and I’m going to say that I’m on Lagassé’s side with this one – MPs can’t just deny the government the ability to exercise their prerogatives without also taking responsibility for it, meaning declaring non-confidence in the government. It’s not how Responsible Government works, and if they’re going to start changing the conventions of such a system of governance that works really quite well, then they need to think long and hard about the consequences of their actions. But that’s part of the problem – nobody wants to look at how actions affect the system as a whole, rather than simply patting themselves on the back for a nebulous and not wholly correct interpretation of what democracy means. And once people start tinkering with the parts without looking at the whole, then big problems start to happen, which we really should beware of.
Roundup: Bringing back the tough-on-crime narrative
Because he needs to change the channel of the national conversation, Stephen Harper announced yesterday that one of his government’s priorities coming back in the fall will be a bill to toughen the sentences for child sex offenders. Because nothing says “tough on crime!” like increasing sentences. Harper also blasted Justin Trudeau for putting pot ahead of the economy – as though it were an either/or proposition, or that there were no economic consequences from legalising marijuana, or the resources that it would free up from enforcing the existing laws in a rather futile way. Harper also seems to think that Trudeau is encouraging youth to use marijuana, when in fact Trudeau has said exactly the opposite – that legalising and regulating it will help to keep it out of the hands of children. But hey, since when to sound bites need to be factually accurate? Harper did say that he would take a look at the Chiefs of Police’s report recommending that marijuana possession be made a ticketable offence rather than one meriting a criminal conviction, so baby steps – right?
Roundup: A routine and legitimate prorogation
While in Whitehorse yesterday, Stephen Harper made it official – Parliament will be prorogued, and come back in October. Not sure when yet in October (though the Hill Times is saying October 21st), at which point they can return with a Speech From the Throne, and a reset of their agenda – which, let’s face it, they badly need by this point as they’ve pretty much exhausted their plans previously. Now, before you start getting angry about prorogation, remember that this is the kind of routine, normal agenda-resetting prorogations that are normal and as indicated, even necessary in the life of a parliament. It’s not being done to avoid a confidence vote, or otherwise thwart the will of the House, so put the placards away. Here, Kady O’Malley has three reasons not to freak out over this prorogation. Are we good? Apparently not, since the opposition parties are now going with the rallying cry that Harper is avoiding accountability for the Senate scandals in Parliament, and so on. Um, okay – I’m not exactly sure how much he could actually answer regarding those Senate spending issues since the Ministry doesn’t control the Senate and can’t actually answer for them under the rubric of ministerial responsibility that governs QP, and they’ve already pretty much hashed out the Wright/Duffy revelations to death, so I’m not exactly sure what “accountability” we’re missing out on. But hey, don’t let the facts spoil a good narrative. Oh, and Harper also said that he has no plans to retire anytime soon and will lead the party in the next election, so there’s that for all the pundits who’ve spent the summer theorising otherwise.
Roundup: The premiers take exception
What’s that? Several premiers are taking exception to the federal factum on Senate reform that says that the government can make changes without provincial consent? You don’t say! It’s almost like we’re a federation and that the provinces have as much say in things relating to the constitution as the federal government does. What a novel concept that is!
Access to Information documents show that the government listened primarily to industry stakeholders when it made changes to the Fisheries Act around the protection of fish habitats – not that this should come as any great surprise.
Roundup: Holding off on a committee investigation
The Commons transport committee met yesterday, some ninety minutes after Transport Canada handed down new rules when it comes to rail safety, based on the two letters that the Transportation Safety Board sent them last week in the wake of the Lac-Mégantic disaster. And while the NDP wanted an immediate study of the rules, the Conservatives and Liberal decided that now was not the time, with as many as nine investigations ongoing or soon to be underway, and that it could either distract or draw too many people away from the front-lines of the investigation. But yes, they would study it, just later.
Roundup: Poor, hard done-by Patrick Brazeau
Global News caught up with Senator Patrick Brazeau as he was moving house in Gatineau, and he insisted that he still hasn’t received any formal notice that his wages are going to be garnished, and he continues to insist that he didn’t do anything wrong or that he broke any rules. He at least knows that he won’t win in the court of public opinion, but insists that he still hasn’t received his due process. Both Brazeau and Mac Harb are expected to have 20 percent of their pay garnished, though the judicial review that Harb has requested may put a spanner in that works.
Roundup: Exit Ted Menzies, eventually
Minister of State for Finance Ted Menzies has announced that he won’t be running in 2015, and has taken him out of the running in the upcoming cabinet shuffle. With Vic Toews’ resignation said to be imminent (and I’ve heard this from caucus sources), this is likely the first of a number of such announcements to be made in the coming couple of weeks. It remains to be speculated if Menzies decision is a genuine desire to move on, of if this isn’t a face-saving exit with political capital intact if he was told that he wasn’t getting back in. Nevertheless, this fuels the shuffle speculation fire in the coming weeks.
Roundup: Another day of the Senate doing its job
The Senate did its job, and sent the union transparency bill back to the Commons. Sixteen senators voted in favour of Conservative Senator Hugh Segal’s amendment, which raised the disclosure level in the bill (to the same level as the government changed Brent Rathgeber’s bill to, as it happens). Oh, and another six Conservative Senators abstained, which pushed the vote over. This has shown the rifts opening up in the Conservative caucus – MPs griping about Senators doing their jobs (because MPs of course never draft and then pass bad bills), and Senators in the caucus who are tired of being bullied into supporting bad bills. And in this case – a bill that was entirely dubious constitutionally – well, it was intolerable for most of them to support it, and yes, numerous Harper appointees voted for the amendment, including one of the “elected” Senators from Alberta. And while some Conservatives are grousing that this is just the Senate trying to justify their existence, it’s really just them doing their jobs. This shouldn’t be dramatic because the Senate is not a rubber stamp, and it never has been. Just because people expect them to be – out of civic ignorance – and are suddenly shocked that the system works the way it’s supposed to, it should be a reminder and a teachable moment. Instead we’re seeing complete butchery of civic literacy among the political talking heads, which is distressing to say the least.