The Invisible Hand

I see Stephane Dion is being his usual deep-thinking self:

"We need to win against the most right-wing prime minister in the history of our country."

Wank.

"Stephen Harper wants to give George W. Bush a third term in Ottawa."

Double wank. And plagiarism, to boot.

One wonders how the Liberals are going to get their self-pleasuring fix after November. The day Obama -- or even McCain -- wins the election, is the day they lose the bogeyman they've been addicted to for the past six years.

Labels: Liberal Party, Stephane Dion, US politics

Well, the Liberals sure are going after the Conservatives on the Chuck Cadman controversy. Unfortunately for them, they missed their chance to vote down the government over the budget...

But wait, they've got an opposition day coming up! They can use it to bring down the government! After all, if their claims about Cadman are true, it would definitely help them in the resulting election campaign.

So, how much do Stephane Dion and the Liberals believe their own claims about Conservative bribery?

...oh.

(h/t: Paul Wells)

Labels: Liberal Party, partisan snarkery, Stephane Dion

Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, for months the government has known about very serious allegations concerning former prime minister Brian Mulroney. It received hundreds of pages on the whole affair.

The Prime Minister even received personal letters from Mr. Schreiber and yet the government did nothing for months. Why?


Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, last week I announced that as a result of a sworn affidavit that has been filed in court the government would appoint an independent third party to advise the government on how to proceed with such allegations.

Let me make clear what we will be doing. We will be asking that independent third party, whom we will be naming very shortly, to provide us with the terms of reference for a full public inquiry as well as any other course of action that the independent party deems appropriate.


Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the information prompting a reaction from the Prime Minister had been in his hands for months: a letter from Mr. Schreiber, marked "To the Addressee Only - For His Eyes Only".

This from a Prime Minister obsessed with controlling everything down to the last detail, as his caucus knows all too well. The Prime Minister is hiding behind the PCO and junior staff in his own office.

Will he step up to the plate and do the right thing, that is to launch immediately a full public inquiry?


Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I just answered this question about a public inquiry. The independent third party will give the government the appropriate terms of reference for such an inquiry, and such an inquiry will be launched.

...

Hon. Stéphane Dion (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, even Mr. Mulroney is calling for a full public inquiry. The Prime Minister must be the only person who does not think it is a good idea.

Why? What is he afraid of? Will he do the right thing? Will he take on his responsibilities and call a full public inquiry now?


Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, the problem is that the Leader of the Opposition had whipped himself up into that question and has failed to listen to the previous two answers.

That is precisely what the government will be doing. Under the circumstances, the independent party that the government will be employing will be making a recommendation to the government on the appropriate terms of inquiry for a full public inquiry.

...


Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, I am having a hard time understanding why the Prime Minister is refusing to hold a public inquiry into the allegations concerning the relationship between former prime minister Brian Mulroney and businessman Karlheinz Schreiber. All of the opposition parties and Mr. Mulroney himself are calling for a public inquiry. We have every reason to wonder what is motivating the Prime Minister.

...

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, as I just said, last week I announced that I would appoint an independent third party to advise the government on this issue. We intend to ask this advisor to give us the appropriate terms of reference for a full public inquiry into this issue.


Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ):
Mr. Speaker, during the sponsorship scandal, the Prime Minister, who was then the leader of the official opposition, continually demanded a public inquiry.

Now I am calling on him not to wait for a recommendation from his adviser, but to tell us today if there is to be a public inquiry and, if so, what kind of inquiry it will be. He should tell us now. He should not ask an adviser to decide for him. He should make an announcement in this House that there will be a public inquiry into this affair.


Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I just said yes. I do not think that it is appropriate for this government to define such a commission's terms of reference, and that is why I will be asking an independent third party to advise us on the appropriate terms of reference for a public inquiry.

...

Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, it is not a happy thing we are talking about here, and it is not a joke. We are talking about people's trust in their government. This is a very very serious situation.

The question is this: is the government going to cooperate with a full and public inquiry, so that everyone will be able to understand what occurred and so that a solution may be reached that is fair to the taxpayer, yes or no? Public, yes or no? Cooperation, yes or no, Mr. Prime Minister?


Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, there are always problems when the opposition parties ask questions without listening to the answers. The answers are yes.

Labels: general stupidity, Gilles Duceppe, Jack Layton, Stephane Dion, Stephen Harper

Yay! Diane Ablonczy finally gets in.

Maxime Bernier to Foreign Affairs: I realize this is considered a promotion, but it seems like a waste to put a strong fiscal conservative in a non-economic role. I would rather he continued to beat down the regulationist hordes in Industry, and have Prentice go straight from Indian to Foreign.

On that note, does anyone have any thoughts on what Prentice will do with his new job? Is he a free marketeer like Bernier, or a meddling interventionist? The pundits tend to refer to him as a "Red Tory", but that seems to be an ignorant extension of his support for same-sex marriage. My pre-merger perception of him was that he was largely on the Blue Tory side. (Note to MSM and bloggers alike: Blue Tory vs. Red Tory is a matter of economic policies, not social ones.)

By all accounts, Prentice did a good job handling the difficult Indian Affairs file; here's hoping Chuck Strahl can do the same. (And furthermore, that Gerry Ritz continues to fight against the statist monstrosity that is the monopsonist Wheat Board.)

Oh, and I see that Dion is being his usual self:

He specifically expressed concern about the prime minister putting Bernier in the role of foreign affairs.

"He has appointed a foreign affairs minister, Minister Bernier, who is very right-wing, very close to the U.S. Republican approach about the economy, so I cannot say that I am satisfied with the changes I have seen today," Dion said.

For starters, Bush has run an administration heavily into subsidies and government intervention, the exact opposite of what Bernier is known for...

Labels: Cabinet, Jim Prentice, Maxime Bernier, Stephane Dion

"We have a prime minister who has George W. Bush as American Idol."

Labels: Stephane Dion

The Liberal Party has released a new TV ad to counter the ones being run by the Conservatives. It touts Stephane Dion's work at the Montreal climate change conference in December 2005. The conference was attended by over 10,000 delegates from around the world, a feat which I'm sure didn't create any extra CO2 emissions. (But I digress...)

Anyway, the ad's narrator proclaims "They said he couldn't do it." (Who "they" are and the "it" he allegedly couldn't do is never specified.) We are then treated to a dramatic shot of "President" Dion banging his gavel, pumping his fists in the air, and declaring "Decided!"

So, what exactly was "decided" under Dion's leadership? Turning to the conference's press release, we find the following (emphasis mine):

• "...a dialogue about the future action has begun..." (Dion's words)
• "Key decisions were made that outline the path to future international action..."
• "A new working group was established to discuss future commitments..."
• "...a dialogue on strategic approaches... was also launched."
• "A series of workshops is planned..."

And so on. The main thing that they "decided" appears to be that they'd continue to get together like this every year to "decide" even more things. Good work, Stephane.

Labels: global warming, Liberal Party, Stephane Dion

For some reason, I really enjoyed the end of this Edmonton Sun article, in particular the last line:

Dion also stopped at the legislature where he was kept waiting 20 minutes before meeting with Premier Ed Stelmach and Ted Morton, a former political science colleague he met years ago.

The new Liberal leader said he just wanted to pay Stelmach a courtesy call to congratulate him on winning the Tory leadership.

Stelmach declined to have his photo taken with Dion.

Awesome.

Labels: Ed Stelmach, Stephane Dion, Ted Morton