header image
The world according to David Graham

Topics

acva bili chpc columns committee conferences elections environment essays ethi faae foreign foss guelph hansard highways history indu internet leadership legal military money musings newsletter oggo pacp parlchmbr parlcmte politics presentations proc qp radio reform regs rnnr satire secu smem statements tran transit tributes tv unity

Recent entries

  1. PMO Staff Run Government; Ministers Represent It
  2. On A Mostly Harmless Birthday
  3. The Trouble With Political Communications
  4. Politics: War By Other Means
  5. On the function of Social media
  6. C-18 is an existential threat, not a benefit, to democracy
  7. On Missing A Little More Than A Sub
  8. The Realpolitik Of Open Nomination
  9. What Is An Open Nomination, Really?
  10. Alberta election about identity, not policy
  11. The Trouble With Electoral Reform
  12. Mr. Bains Goes to Rogers
  13. Question Period
  14. Why do lockdowns and pandemic restrictions continue to exist?
  15. Parliamentary privilege: an arcane concept that can prevent coups
  16. It's not over yet
  17. Trump will win in 2020 (and keep an eye on 2024)
  18. A podcast with Michael Geist on technology and politics
  19. Next steps
  20. On what electoral reform reforms
  21. 2019 Fall campaign newsletter / infolettre campagne d'automne 2019
  22. 2019 Summer newsletter / infolettre été 2019
  23. 2019-07-15 SECU 171
  24. 2019-06-20 RNNR 140
  25. 2019-06-17 14:14 House intervention / intervention en chambre
  26. 2019-06-17 SECU 169
  27. 2019-06-13 PROC 162
  28. 2019-06-10 SECU 167
  29. 2019-06-06 PROC 160
  30. 2019-06-06 INDU 167
  31. older entries...

2016-04-19 13:45 House intervention / intervention en chambre

Cabinet Ministers, Conflict of interest, Fundraising and fundraisers, Minister of Justice, Opposition motions, References to members,

Allusions aux députés, Membres du cabinet, Ministre de la Justice

Mr. Speaker, if the member believes the rules should be changed, why does he believe the ethically challenged government that recently left office did nothing substantial to change those rules? Why is his party putting forward a frivolous motion that does not make a substantial change now, rather than making solid and concrete proposals?

Is it because the member is afraid that clearer rules would require us to, say, require the preceding leader of his party to reveal who bankrolled his leadership campaigns to the tune of $2 million, or is it just that more Conservatives will wind up in leg irons? Maybe it is just because the member knows that nothing wrong actually took place.

Monsieur le Président, si le député croit que les règles devraient être modifiées, pourquoi croit-il que le gouvernement à l'éthique douteuse qui a récemment cédé le pouvoir n'a rien fait de concret pour modifier ces règles? Pourquoi son parti présente-t-il une motion futile qui n'apporte aucun changement dans l'immédiat plutôt que de formuler des propositions solides et concrètes?

Serait-ce parce que le député craint que des règles plus claires obligeraient l'ancien chef de son parti à révéler qui a financé ses campagnes à la direction à la hauteur de 2 millions de dollars, ou est-ce simplement parce que d'autres conservateurs se retrouveraient les fers aux pieds? Peut-être est-ce parce que le député sait que rien de mal ne s'est véritablement produit.

Watch | HansardEcoutez | Hansard

Posted at 13:26 on April 19, 2016

This entry has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.

2016-04-19 10:59 House intervention / intervention en chambre | hansard parlchmbr tv |

2016-04-19 17:08 House intervention / intervention en chambre

(RSS) Website generating code and content © 2001-2020 David Graham <david@davidgraham.ca>, unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved. Comments are © their respective authors.