For the record - Macleans.ca
 

For the record


 

In case you were wondering, the House of Commons, by a vote of 146 to 129, approved the following motion this evening.

Mr. Dewar (Ottawa Centre), seconded by Mr. Harris (St. John’s East), moved, — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should, in accordance with Part 1 of the Inquiries Act, call a Public Inquiry into the transfer of detainees in Canadian custody to Afghan authorities from 2001 to 2009.


 

For the record

  1. Well, Psiclone, Jarrid, Dakota et al.

    Wisdom or folly, it looks like the Liberals are willing to open the doors to an enquiry all the way back to 2001

    Just what is SH afraid of?

  2. Liberals are bluffing. They know that 1- the motion is non-binding, and 2- the Tories would never agree to it anyway, so what's the harm in proposing it and voting for it? It makes them look like they're taking the high road, but secretly, the Liberals don't want such an inquiry.

    If the Liberals are sincere, Ignatieff would announce that a Liberal government would immediately begin a public inquiry into detainee transfers since 2001. That would truly be the high road, because it's not just an empty motion with a meaningless vote.

    Just look at the wording of the motion: "Should" call a public inquiry? Really? Should? How about "pretty please with a cherry on top?"

  3. Liberals are bluffing. They know that 1- the motion is non-binding, and 2- the Tories would never agree to it anyway, so what's the harm in proposing it and voting for it? It makes them look like they're taking the high road, but secretly, the Liberals don't want such an inquiry.

    If the Liberals are sincere, Ignatieff would announce that a Liberal government would immediately begin a public inquiry into detainee transfers since 2001. That would truly be the high road, because it's not just an empty motion with a meaningless vote.

    Just look at the wording of the motion: "Should" call a public inquiry? Really? Should? How about "pretty please with a cherry on top?"

  4. What happened to your post singling out certain commenters?

  5. I decided it was boorish of me.

  6. As opposed to the Harper high road of smearing the opposition as being unpatriotic? That's a bit rich.

    The Liberals are bluffing ? Then the Government can call their bluff.

  7. I'm surprised the way the vote broke down.

  8. the bluff is completely on the hands of the current CPC government…. the power of transparency is in their hands.

  9. If there is nothing to hide, respect the will of parliament, and let this issue go before the judiciary.
    If nothing is found, and it turns out to be a waste of money – bonus for Harper.

  10. Yeah, because the Liberals would never hold a public inquiry into something that could potentially damage them.

    That would NEVER happen.

    • I always thought the main function of a public inquiry was to delay resolution of the matter in question until everyone is sick to death of hearing about it & doesn't care any more.

  11. You know it was an NDP motion, right?

    Though I love how you just make stuff up. The liberals "secretly" do not want an inquiry? Does making that up make you feel better about the fact the conservatives very openly do not want an inquiry?

    • Make stuff up? I'm giving my opinion, not reporting news.

  12. I'm surprised the way the vote broke down.