7

In this new crisis, the faint echo of a previous crisis

From the coalition crisis of 2008 to the Senate crisis of 2013


 

First, CTV says Pamela Wallin was forced out amid concerns about the audit of her expenses. Next, CTV says the Senate’s report on Mike Duffy was edited as part of a deal with Nigel Wright. Via Twitter, the Prime Minister’s director of communications denies CTV’s report that the Prime Minister might prorogue Parliament in early June.

The weekly meeting of the Conservative caucus, which normally occurs on Wednesday, has been rescheduled for Tuesday morning before the Prime Minister departs for Peru. The Star describes this as an emergency caucus meeting at which the Prime Minister is expected to set out a zero tolerance policy on spending transgressions.

Jason Fekete notes that Mr. Duffy, Ms. Wallin and Patrick Brazeau were all nominated for the Senate on the same day—December 22, 2008—along with 15 other Conservative appointees. But that date is particularly interesting for everything that occurred in the month preceding it.

In the 2006 election, the Conservatives promised to not appoint to the Senate anyone who hadn’t won a mandate to do so from voters. And up until December 22, 2008, Stephen Harper had only appointed two senators—Michael Fortier, shortly after the 2006 election, so that Mr. Fortier might serve in cabinet, and Bert Brown in 2007 with Mr. Brown having won a Senate election in Alberta.

Then Stephen Harper almost lost his government.

Four weeks before those 18 appointees were announced, the Conservative government tabled its fall economic update (the last such economic update to be tabled in the House, actually). The measures contained therein, including the elimination of the public subsidy for political parties, had precipitated coalition talks between the Liberals and New Democrats. On December 1, the Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois announced their accord. Facing an imminent vote of non-confidence and the possible replacement of his government with a coalition government led by Stephane Dion, Mr. Harper asked the Governor General, Michaelle Jean at the time, to prorogue Parliament. After some consideration, she agreed to do so.

The coalition’s moment might have thus passed, but it was not yet officially dead. The Liberals quickly installed Michael Ignatieff as leader and he maintained that the coalition was an option. Not until Parliament reconvened in late January and a new budget was tabled, did Mr. Ignatieff effectively kill the coalition.

Just as Mr. Ignatieff was taking over the Liberal caucus, the Prime Minister’s Office revealed that Mr. Harper would fill 18 Senate vacancies before Christmas. A debate about the legitimacy of doing so ensued. Mr. Harper claimed to be in a difficult spot that compelled him to do something. And then, on December 22, Mr. Harper named his 18 appointees, asserting that the appointments were important both in the pursuit of Senate reform and in the interests of opposing the coalition.

“Our government will continue to push for a more democratic, accountable and effective Senate,” said the Prime Minister. “If Senate vacancies are to be filled, however, they should be filled by the government that Canadians elected rather than by a coalition that no one voted for.”

The incoming Senators have all pledged to support eight-year term limits and other Senate reform legislation. Each incoming Senator has also declared his or her unwavering commitment to support Canadian unity and oppose the coalition.

This did not go over terribly well with Mr. Harper’s opponents.

“Mr. Harper knows that he does not have the confidence of the House of Commons,” Ignatieff said in a statement. “Appointing senators when he lacks a mandate from Parliament is not acceptable.”

It’s possible that the coalition was less a cause of the appointments than an excuse to make them. And possibly Mr. Harper was going to have to appoint senators at some point anyway (he’d hinted at such a possibility in October 2008). But December 22, 2008 does now seem like the plot point of a bad political thriller.

Four and a half years later, the Harper government’s Senate reform legislation is collecting dust while the Supreme Court prepares to hear a reference on the matter and three of the December 2008 appointees have either been removed or removed themselves from the Conservative caucus.


 

In this new crisis, the faint echo of a previous crisis

  1. Somewhere, in a univerise almost identical to our own, Prime Minister Ignatieff, past the halfway point of his second term, is very candidly giving his opinion on these very matters.

    • Does Toronto have a real mayor there instead of an out-of-control yokel? I’ve been thinking of moving, and that universe sounds okay…

  2. Talk about a day late and a dollar short, Mr. Harper. Time to preach zero tolerance for expense abuse would have been last year when this problem first surfaced. And given that you have been the political beneficiary of this fraud, you might want to offer up an apology for screwing the taxpayers.

    • It’s not zero tolerance for expense abuse, it’s for transgressions. ie, getting caught breaking the rules.

      Note that the full quote in the Star is “Harper is expected to make clear there will be zero tolerance for spending transgressions and that any Tory who runs afoul of the rules will be tossed from the party to sit as an independent.”

      That second clause makes a huge difference.

  3. Poor judgment on the part of Stephen Harper – both the economic update and his decision to recommend for appointment people under investigation of wrongdoings to the Senate. In any case, these appointments did not gain him a majority in the upper house, which was attained in 2010.

    Again, Mr. Harper’s statement shows how he willfully misleads Canadians on the nature of our institutions by claiming that Canadians elect a government (“by the government that Canadians elected rather than by a coalition that no one voted for…’). Of course we don’t elect a government. We elect deputies to the house of commons. The government is appointed by the GG. Not surprising from a man who has made a career of ridiculing Canada, Canadians and our institutions.

  4. ““If Senate vacancies are to be filled, however, they should be filled by the government that Canadians elected–” This when he feared being given the boot democratically, and he feared his Reform agenda was in jeopardy — obviously he decided least he could pack the senate with RepubliCon bag men (and ladies) to try and kneecap any replacement government — always a class act, Steve.

  5. Good timing to resign. The crime is done now pay harper.

Sign in to comment.