Michael Ignatieff and the Continuing Saga of Unfulfilled Promise

(No, I’m not going to write a Dear John letter to Michael Ignatieff.  I never expected him to amount to great leader; I just hoped he might become one.)

I’ve found Ezra Levant to have been a little reactionary regarding the Afghan detainee scandal.  The allusions made by Liberal MPs and pundits implying Canadians have committed war crimes are a little distasteful, but it does not seem helpful to get into a debate about whether or not someone made such a claim explicitly or implicitly.  Nonetheless, he does nab Mr. Ignatieff saying something rather disappointing:

Ignatieff said Liberals will work with other opposition parties to continue exploring the Afghan detainee issue while Parliament is shuttered. And he lambasted Harper for proroguing rather than complying with a Commons resolution demanding that the government turn over documents related to torture accusations levelled by diplomat Richard Colvin.

“Democracy breaks down if a prime minister defies the elected representatives of the people on a matter of that importance,” he said.

Ignatieff said the documents would shed light on such crucial matters as whether Canada has respected international law and human rights, “the conduct of our troops in the field” and the conduct of the government which appears to have ignored warnings about torture.

“This is really serious stuff,” he said, adding that Liberals “will not let up about this.”

(via The Canadian Press)

One of my hopes for this prorogation was for Mr. Ignatieff to begin showing some leadership.  Whatever one’s political inclinations, I hope most of us believe that a strong and principled opposition is healthy for our democracy.  I haven’t seen that from Mr. Ignatieff in the past, and, by conflating the conduct of Canadian troops on the ground in Afghanistan with the conduct of our political leadership, he does a disservice to those of us who wish to see an open and impartial investigation.

On this topic, Canadian Cynic asks:

There’s nothing magical or sacrosanct about being a member of Canada’s military. They have rules. They’re supposed to know those rules. And they’re supposed to follow those rules. And if they don’t follow them, they should expect to be punished for it. And if they knowingly and deliberately committed war crimes, what’s wrong with suggesting they be held accountable?

He is, obviously, correct.  Accountability does not disappear with the donning of a uniform.  My issue with Mr. Ignatieff’s insinuation is that we don’t have a whole lot of information to back it up.  In fact, we have stories of soldiers trying to do the right thing.  I can be as much a fan of hyperbole as the next person, but it is unhelpful in the pursuit of truth to begin with the concern that our troops are behaving inappropriately.  Further, such a stance only helps to marginalize the views of those of us who believe we need a fair investigation in order to find out what happened rather than a witch hunt.

I understand Mr. Ignatieff’s desire to score some political points.  Lord knows, the Conservative’s have scored enough at his expense.  However, what we, as a nation, need most from Mr. Ignatieff is an opposition leader who shows, you know, leadership.  Mr. Ignatieff has a wonderful opportunity to define his leadership on his own terms.

He’s not off to a good start.

The Olympics, Prorogue and the Moral Vacuity of the Conservative Party

Well, the rumours aren’t true… well, at least the part about them being rumours are no longer true.

Parliament will not resume on January 25.  It will resume in March.  On March 3rd, we’ll have a speech from the throne.  On March 4, we’ll have the joy of a budget presentation.  There is a lot of conjecture as to why Parliament will be prorogued for two months, from the trite (MPs want to go to the Olympics) to the strategic (Mr. Harper wants to send some more Tories to the senate) to the abhorrent (the Conservative Party wants the whole Afghan detainee scandal to go away).  No matter the reason, it is cynical and distasteful.

If it is all about the Olympics – whether the desire to attend or the desire to avoid a tough session of Question Period during the Olympics – the Conservatives are children playing in an adult world.  Suspending a democratic legislature for the sake of international spectacle is not what a mature nation does, not when there are important issues to deal with.

If they are doing this to stack the senate, well, then they are who we thought they were: Politicians, of the same ilk as any other cynical politician, be it Jean Chretien, Belinda Stronach or Brian Mulroney.  In such a case, they deserve not only our scorn and ridicule, but also a little – just a little – of our pity.

But I’m not an idiot.  These issues may play into the political calculations (rarely would a government act without considering a variety of implications), but there is little doubt that they are trying to make the populace forget that this government is an accomplice to torture.  The Conservative Party has attempted to thwart investigations into the question of the treatment of prisoners in Afghanistan for months.  More and more evidence is appearing implicating various members of our government of, at the very least, unacceptable ignorance of torture.  As this story has grown and evolved, the government has acted all the more guilty, all the more complicit.  Where we once might have accepted a mea culpa, we must now only accept a scalp.  Sadly, not since Brian Mulroney was burned in electoral effigy, via the repulsion of Kim Campbell, has the Canadian electorate taken serious their duty to repudiate a governing party so greatly steeped in political transgression.  It is my worry that when responsible government returns in March and, later, when our current government is forced to stand before voters, the voters will shrug.

Writing at what is, generally, a fairly conservative web site, I fully expect vitriolic responses from Conservatives.  Once, reading about Levi Strauss, I witnessed him described as a conservative, in that what he wanted to conserve is liberal democracy.  It is those conservatives to whom I write.

(As always, you should be reading Scott H. Payne for insight on these matters.)

Michael Ignatieff is playing games with Parliament

Yeah, so I read a very short time ago that Michael Ignatieff, the man who can not “Prop Up” the Government anymore, is more than happy to facilitate the speedy passage of the EI Bill that is the focus of so much attention lately.

As stated in the CTV Article:

“We don’t want to give Mr. Layton any alibis,” Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said.

Seriously? So Michael Ignatieff’s sole reason for supporting the passage of this bill is to stick it to Jack Layton? What kind of responsible “Government in Waiting” is THAT!?!

Although Liberals believe the EI bill “falls radically short of serious employment insurance reform,” Ignatieff said they want to expedite its passage.

“We’re not going to hold it up. Let’s get it through and get to the motion of non-confidence which we will bring forward in due time.”

It seems Michael Ignatieff is so desperate to take us to an election, that he has decided to play games with the Parliamentary System and stick it to the other leaders of the opposition just to have his way.

If I could describe this in a word?

Despicable.

Contemptible, Irresponsible, Ignorant, Careless, and Immature also come to mind, but I think Despicable sums it up.

Still, if Michael wants to work with the Government (???) and get this legislation passed, that’s great. It will only serve to highlight his hypocrisy when he goes to his desired Non-Confidence motion.

Harper’s Options on the Coalition Government

Andrew Steele provides ten different options he feels are available to the Prime Minister.

He missed another option – proceed with the vote as scheduled next week.  After losing the vote visit the Governor General and request the dissolution of parliament and an election call.  If the GG rejects that request and hands the opposition parties the key’s to the government, Harper and his caucus could resign – effectively forcing the GG to dissolve parliament and hold a general election to fill the 70+ (mostly safe Conservative seats in western Canada) vacant seats.

If you think we’re in a crisis now, just imagine if that option was exercised

Update: Bourque has a poll up on this last option: 54% say yes to the mass resignation.