The "Iggy Flop" seems to have become a common occurrence in Canadian politics. What did he say today, "I was against it until I supported it" or something like that? Mike Ignatieff seems to have changed his mind on releasing MP expenses, or at least it appears. Today he wasn't saying that MPs should open up the books, but instead that the Auditor General should talk to MPs. It was funny to watch Martha Hall Findlay make half a dozen references to Iggy's bold and brave leadership on the MP expenses issue. You could tell that she had nothing because she just kept repeating the same talking points over and over again.
Ultimately MP expenses should be made public. None of the parties want to, but there is strong pressure from the public from all sides of the political spectrum. It is a no brainer. I am waiting for an official government position on this issue. I’m sure they realize that the strong majority of their base want to see this happen. Iggy wants to be seen to embrace public opinion by having the AG speak to the committee, but there is also some strong dissent from within his own caucus to the bold and brave stand he appeared to take yesterday. The dissent is likely coming from those in his caucus who are either being sued or have abused their expense accounts.
What the hell is there for the AG to talk to MP's about. She (doing her job) made the request to the MP's, they said no. It is up to the elected MP's to clearly state why they refused. They haven't done that. Iffy is as usual trying to bull$#!t it all into a delay hoping it will go away. Gee what a surprise!!!!!
ReplyDeleteMP's of ALL the parties should be questioned by the voters of their constituency.
Rob C
Right on!
ReplyDeleteMartha kept repeating the same talking-points over and over and Evan had to interrupt in order to attempt to get something relevant out of her.
Lawyer's - Who ever said talk is cheap, never had to hire one and I'm sure Martha is a Doozy when she gets in second gear.
All for nought though - I see the Cons are almost 10 points up again and there will be lots of rhetoric and spin about - Oh!, who pays attention to the polls.
Too funny!
Oh Iffy, LOL.
ReplyDeleteYes, do tell the AG what she CAN NOT audit,
that will really look good on yah.
Would the AG be auditing back as far as the last audit in 1991 (?)
If so, the Libs should be worried,
and the Cons should step back so as not to look like they are on a witch hunt.
Heh, maybe the AG can finally find those Adscam slush funds!
I still don't get why the lily white Dippers are against transparency and accountability....?
A party that refuses to clean up the leadership loan mess from 2006?
ReplyDeleteA party that is most reliant of the political party subsidy?
A party that helps keep the lights for the Bloc (87% Party Welfare).
A political party that refuses to return the G.S.T. overpayment?
Why would you expect a party that has no financial discipline to allow the A.G. to have a closer look at the book?
A big problem may be spending by the speaker on entertaining guests and his duties.
Do you remember the Govt spend millions to build a tunnel in Ottawa so the Senators would not have to deal with "bad" weather?
I can't remember, but exactly how much but it was insanely expensive.
There are some legitimate process issues, that haven't been much discussed, but affect any progress that can be made on this issue.
ReplyDeleteFirst, the MPs on the Board of Internal Economy meet "in camera", which means they have to keep all their discussions private. Second, any decisions they arrive at, have to be done on a consensus basis, not by a vote of the majority. Third, uber process wonk Peter Milliken is the chairman of the committee, and he is on record as opposing the AG's request.
Most people assume that Milliken and some other MPs have something to hide, which may very well be true. But maybe there are constitutional, or precedent-setting issues involved here too.
What we need are one or more constitutional experts out there to make Milliken's case for him, since obviously he cannot publicly defend his position. There was no shortage of experts on prorogation, so come on guys, help us out here. What might Milliken be worried about ?
Here's my question...why haven't reporters cornered the members of the Board of Internal Economy to ask questions....something is very weird about it? Something else is going on here...
ReplyDeleteThis morning the newscaster on Global was reporting on Harpers use of a stylist and the fact that we pay for her travel. Hmmmmm....IS THIS the newest tactic of the opps and the MSM - suggest the Conservatives are misusing public funds? Is this why none of the board members have been questioned?
I've been thinking and wondering whether the seeming reluctance on the part of the Harper conservatives is really a trap being set for the opposition who, once they see the wrath of the public will agree to open the doors and books to the auditor general?
ReplyDeleteThen, when the public sees how all political parties are spending their money, it would be easy for the PM to re-introduce killing the taxpayer subsidy to political parties.
I just can't square that the fiscally conservative Harper gang would object to this kind of accountability unless their setting a trap.
I suppose technically Iggy made the statement Thursday not "today", but I wrote this last night when yesterday was today.
ReplyDelete