First off, big fat apologies for the lack of committee updates for the last two days. Since yesterday’s fateful press conference at Conservative Party headquarters, I’ve been tracking the Tale of the Tape, which seems to get more convoluted, confusing and contradictory with each new revelation that emerges. (To that end, I’ve put together a timeline here, which may or may not be helpful for anyone else who is trying to figure out the background machinations behind this latest twist.)
I’m still planning on being at the Ethics committee this afternoon, which is when debate over Charles Hubbard’s motion to investigate the Conservative in and out election spending scheme is supposed to get underway.
Whether they’ll actually get around to voting on it or not, however, will depend on what the Conservatives do: If they decide to follow the example set by their colleagues at Procedure and House Affairs, this could be the beginning of the end of functionality for yet another committee.
Also on the hotseat at committee today: Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn, who will be grilled over the decision by AECL to mothball the MAPLE reactors, and the possible impact that decision may have on Canada’s isotope supply. (AECL president Hugh MacDiarmid will testify during the second hour.)
Oh, and Mark Holland has a motion before Government Operations and Estimates to review the Lynch Report on the NAFTA/Brodie/PMO/CTV Leak Thing “to consider whether the scope” was “appropriate.” His motion is on the schedule for today’s meeting, but the committee may run out of time, in which case it’ll be first on the agenda at the next meeting.
Finally, there is the Liberal opposition motion for today, which calls on the House to amend the Members’ Conflict of Interest Code, as follows:
- that, in order to clarify and assure those privileges, Section 3(3) of the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, which is Appendix I to the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, is amended by deleting the word “or” at the end of paragraph (b) and by adding the following after paragraph (b):
- “(b.1) consists of being a party to a legal action relating to actions of the Member as a Member of Parliament; or”;
- that, pursuant to section 28(13) of the Conflict of Interest Code, the House refer the Thibault Inquiry Report back to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner for reconsideration in the light of the amendment to the Code; and
- that the House affirm its confidence in the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
That this House reaffirm all of its well-established privileges and immunities, especially with regard to freedom of speech;
(See? Told you it wasn’t over.)