The Speaker takes a stand (V)

by Aaron Wherry

Jim Abbott is up now defending Tim Uppal’s right to impugn the character of Michael Ignatieff.

Mr. Abbott is trying to explain the situation with a hockey game analogy. Apparently the “referee” threatens to “ruin the entire game” with this sudden change in the rules.

Liberal Derek Lee responds that the rules have not changed, they are merely now being enforced.




Browse

The Speaker takes a stand (V)

  1. I mean, are the Conservatives REALLY arguing this?

    • Yes they are, because they are the party that stands for law and order for everyone but them.

  2. Explain to me how anything Tim Uppal said was impugned Michael Ignatieff’s character.

    • You’re not allowed to attack individual members in Members Statements. It’s as simple as that, as soon as an attack on an individual member is launched it is against the rules. The latest example prior to this were members (Liberals) being cut off during the infamous MacKay/Stronach debacle awhile back (MacKay has been accused of pointing to Stronach’s desk and saying “you have her” when another member asked MacKay where his dog was). Scheer did not however, that if members were to say “Liberal Party” instead of mentioning the leader directly, than that would likely be allowed.

      • Fair enough, but Aaron said he was impugning his character. He may be breaking the rules as interpreted by the speaker, but he’s not impugning character by talking about specific divergences on policy between himself or his party and the leader of the opposition, whether you believe they are rooted in fact or not.

        • Have you bothered to read any of the statements?

          There was very little “policy debate” going on. Calling the Leader of the Opposition a “flip-flopper”, making up stories and lies about positions he has not taken, etc…

          That’s not policy. It’s impugning character.

  3. Was anyone surprised when Poilievre stood up for his daily condescending lecture on how “disagreement is natural”? He compared the stifling of the CPC personal attacks against Ignatieff to “Czarist Russia.” *rolls eyes*

  4. Just got through my tifo’d backlog of the debate and have one thing to say: Well done, Deputy Speaker Scheer.

    • I agree – he did uphold Miliken’s ruling. Surprising but very welcomed!

  5. The CPC is defending the right to slander…?

    Nice.

    • No, they’re defending their right to govern.. because they don’t know any other means to do so.

  6. I thought the rumor of low Conservative morale was Liberal spin but I am starting to wonder if it is indeed the case since they seem so unfocused, for example pursuing the ability to insult their political foes so vigorously, while everyone else is focused on the economy.

    • and to sue them, and to fire them, and where have you been for the last 3 years? it’s disgusting their behaviour is.

  7. Poilievre’s performance today was so obviously a case of overdone respect to the Speaker in order to show his contempt. What does it say about this ‘bright young politician’ when his highest ambition appears to be leading the mob to undermine the dignity and decorum of the House?

  8. Truth is – the CONS are using taxpayer funded parliamentary time to do negative attacks in their constant campaign mode.

    • Of course if these were Liberal ads on Conservatives you would probably approve it I am sure LOL!!!!!

  9. Regardless of where you stand on Decorum in the House(tm) – I bet most of us are in favour of it – Mr. Lee is making a ridiculous argument. A rule that is not enforced is no rule at all. Just because something is scrawled on a sheet of paper doesn’t make it so, and if the Speaker has only now decided to enforce this rule after years of it standing idle then yes, it is a new rule.

    And a good rule, at that. But let’s not pretend that this isn’t a change.

  10. Mark my words … the next fundraising letter out of Conservative HQ will be a screed against the bias of the “Liberal Speaker”. Then they’ll work that into the rotation along with the CBC, the public service, the courts, and the Coalition of course.

    • Oh no, I love watching the CBC, I work for the public services, I aspire to one day plead in front of the courts (but that’s not a real dream) and I was iffy on the Coalition.
      Does that make me enemy #2 for the Conservatives?

  11. Members of the other opposition parties should make a list of the significant people and events who are currently going unsung in the ridings of the Member’s Statement Character Assassination Brigade.

    They should then use some of their own MS slots to sing the praises of the people Tim Uppal et. al are ignoring in their eagerness to attack others.

    Finally, they should mail into the ridings of Polievre, Uppal and the rest contrast literature that shows–with illustrative quotations–what the Conservatives have been using their MSs for, and what the others have been using them for.

    • Now that is a good idea.

    • @Stephen

      true; we do this (commenting on the state of things) every day here there and everywhere here in First Life and in the bricks’n'mortar world. it’s time we took our power back; the human uses the saw the saw doesn’t human.

    • @Stephen

      true; we do this (comment on the state of things) every day here there and everywhere here in First Life and in the bricks’n'mortar world. it’s time we took our power back; the human uses the saw the saw doesn’t human.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *